Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/11] Introduce Simple atomic and non-atomic counters | From | Shuah Khan <> | Date | Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:21:01 -0600 |
| |
On 9/28/20 5:13 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 04:41:47PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 9/26/20 10:29 AM, Kees Cook wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >>>> 7. Verified that the test module compiles in kunit env. and test >>>> module can be loaded to run the test. >>> >>> I meant write it using KUnit interfaces (e.g. KUNIT_EXPECT*(), >>> kunit_test_suite(), etc): >>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kunit/ >>> >>> Though I see the docs are still not updated[1] to reflect the Kconfig >>> (CONFIG_foo_KUNIT_TEST) and file naming conventions (foo_kunit.c). >>> >> >> I would like to be able to run this test outside Kunit env., hence the >> choice to go with a module and kselftest script. It makes it easier to >> test as part of my workflow as opposed to doing a kunit and build and >> running it that way. > > It does -- you just load it normally like before and it prints out > everything just fine. This is how I use the lib/test_user_copy.c and > lib/test_overflow.c before/after their conversions. >
I am not seeing any kunit links to either of these tests. I find the lib/test_overflow.c very hard to read.
I am going to stick with what I have for now and handle conversion later.
I think it might be a good idea to add tests for atomic_t and refcount_t APIS as well at some point.
thanks, -- Shuah
| |