From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7CDAC2D0DB for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 21:19:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 755B420674 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 21:19:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="UxSawPEj" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726663AbgA2VTI (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 16:19:08 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-f196.google.com ([209.85.210.196]:37840 "EHLO mail-pf1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726171AbgA2VTI (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 16:19:08 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-f196.google.com with SMTP id p14so308418pfn.4 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:19:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+hDQAX34j2Scqm0cOO1CyUImmUew2WxU5247BGER7dY=; b=UxSawPEjuU8FcEVTFXeV+8fPyjejUz2O2GIiBAdoDAVFy9BgrpyDdwrWW/Qw/2J7ya FZ3Hx7C3W8oBpKsfbmp0gcB6UuG6HCj996xrlRomauFSWUUkw1WSDiYPt+gyeAvsDM8J KOcA9yUDtsyGqXt3j9CoaEHIZjsv5vX9WRJS+1BFVxd2ZZsKZ61Y5xn2O9TyueeSevNe 3HynVm+hSZdJHxWhsiP6dcIrpF1AqWQTN1wm7n/YeICb9e29ywqkZW8GbIbfpGFKmKzZ fBgtZeeHipIaN5zsaA1KEPpdP38j6n64hmv3cpQViCU8n8pwKNaxkHJeeBc4f/NHQRvk NZJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+hDQAX34j2Scqm0cOO1CyUImmUew2WxU5247BGER7dY=; b=Jn1SJGANSJyM6jrPftxR9rA+ls8iSTvZMVSKFv+HBi/3XGp9/1hrPu8JmxPCg8nqd0 b73IdD56AnsAAQILf4Kpn9o9ZOGCYhSL951cWfue93b+g4pQsemngrSWAeV6wK0uFi/l CIzFUof3PqNXbrxqg1qbsg6pTds6oZsmgrzvjUt0CNefiTGdcBM8L98MnqWLWeQLt1tP rYsG7iU40X8OGZqzVQx39oK/6sw3zp8Vfj9tFoxi67mtcUQaFQXCMVkJeuNJgJrffUba c15Vzmb03BQsIhQTA9PDtNlEE4efGLoN6/2q4ve0DwPU68Q8qRIVCNJ6UXtcSRmv8HMC CJuQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU0pn+s6k/LgvWZ9xgKHZZ/L3OZMBsYxulQRf0ZiFbvgNZ2ltVU ZhL2IFZTlYE6AQ6suGno6wd10qpAbxeZ60VFep68Pw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz8Ek9aAZM7bbtF2TInvqPq0TxdAQovVbgPfNg0x3Ic53N8b+s11tC5qEwNcBJ6IzRzAQElzR1+afYbaPQH8+4= X-Received: by 2002:a63:597:: with SMTP id 145mr1045907pgf.384.1580332747259; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:19:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191216220555.245089-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20200106224022.GX11244@42.do-not-panic.com> <594b7815-0611-34ea-beb5-0642114b5d82@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Brendan Higgins Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:18:55 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC v1 0/6] kunit: create a centralized executor to dispatch all KUnit tests To: Frank Rowand Cc: "Bird, Timothy" , Alan Maguire , Luis Chamberlain , Jeff Dike , Richard Weinberger , Anton Ivanov , Arnd Bergmann , Kees Cook , Shuah Khan , Iurii Zaikin , David Gow , Andrew Morton , rppt@linux.ibm.com, Greg KH , Stephen Boyd , Logan Gunthorpe , Knut Omang , linux-um , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , KUnit Development , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 8:24 PM Frank Rowand wrote: > > On 1/28/20 1:53 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:35 AM wrote: > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Frank Rowand on January 28, 2020 11:37 AM > >>> > >>> On 1/28/20 1:19 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > >>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 9:40 AM Frank Rowand wrote: > >> ... > >>>> we could add Kconfigs to control this, but the compiler nevertheless > >>>> complains because it doesn't know what phase KUnit runs in. > >>>> > >>>> Is there any way to tell the compiler that it is okay for non __init > >>>> code to call __init code? I would prefer not to have a duplicate > >>>> version of all the KUnit libraries with all the symbols marked __init. > >>> > >>> I'm not sure. The build messages have always been useful and valid in > >>> my context, so I never thought to consider that possibility. > >>> > >>>> Thoughts? > >> > >> I'm not sure there's a restriction on non __init code calling __init > >> code. In init/main.c arch_call_reset_init() is in __init, and it calls > >> rest_init which is non __init, without any special handling. > >> > >> Is the compiler complaint mentioned above related to calling > >> into __init code, or with some other issue? > > > > I distinctly remember having the compiler complain at me when I was > > messing around with the device tree unit tests because of KUnit > > calling code marked as __init. Maybe it's time to start converting > > those to KUnit to force the issue? Frank, does that work for you? > > I have agreed to try converting the devicetree unittest to KUnit. > > Now that KUnit is in 5.5, I think there is a solid foundation for > me to proceed. Awesome! Last time we talked (offline), it sounded like you had a clear idea of what you wanted to do; nevertheless, feel free to reuse anything from my attempt at it, if you find anything useful, or otherwise rope me in if you have any questions, comments, or complaints.