Consider this attempt to run KUnit in QEMU:
$ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch=x86
Before you'd get this error message:
kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch
After:
kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch, options are ['alpha', 'arm', 'arm64', 'i386', 'powerpc', 'riscv', 's390', 'sparc', 'x86_64']
This should make it a bit easier for people to notice when they make
typos, etc. Currently, one would have to dive into the python code to
figure out what the valid set is.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 5 +++--
tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 4 ++++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
index 1870e75ff153..a6b3cee3f0d0 100644
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
@@ -198,8 +198,9 @@ def get_source_tree_ops(arch: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> LinuxSourceT
return LinuxSourceTreeOperationsUml(cross_compile=cross_compile)
elif os.path.isfile(config_path):
return get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path, cross_compile)[1]
- else:
- raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch')
+
+ options = [f[:-3] for f in os.listdir(QEMU_CONFIGS_DIR) if f.endswith('.py')]
+ raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch, options are ' + str(sorted(options)))
def get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path: str,
cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> Tuple[
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
index cad37a98e599..2ae72f04cbe0 100755
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
@@ -289,6 +289,10 @@ class LinuxSourceTreeTest(unittest.TestCase):
pass
kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir)
+ def test_invalid_arch(self):
+ with self.assertRaisesRegex(kunit_kernel.ConfigError, 'not a valid arch, options are.*x86_64'):
+ kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', arch='invalid')
+
# TODO: add more test cases.
base-commit: 865a0a8025ee0b54d1cc74834c57197d184a441e
--
2.33.0.685.g46640cef36-goog
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:26 AM Daniel Latypov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Consider this attempt to run KUnit in QEMU:
> $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch=x86
>
> Before you'd get this error message:
> kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch
>
> After:
> kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch, options are ['alpha', 'arm', 'arm64', 'i386', 'powerpc', 'riscv', 's390', 'sparc', 'x86_64']
>
> This should make it a bit easier for people to notice when they make
> typos, etc. Currently, one would have to dive into the python code to
> figure out what the valid set is.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
> ---
This is really nice, particularly given that we've had to reproduce
that list in lots of talks, documentation, etc. and it could get
out-of-date.
Reviewed-by: David Gow <[email protected]>
[FYI: this didn't seem to apply cleanly to kselftest/kunit head, but
it was a pretty minor issue with kunit_tool_test.py.]
Thanks,
-- David
> tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 5 +++--
> tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 4 ++++
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> index 1870e75ff153..a6b3cee3f0d0 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> @@ -198,8 +198,9 @@ def get_source_tree_ops(arch: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> LinuxSourceT
> return LinuxSourceTreeOperationsUml(cross_compile=cross_compile)
> elif os.path.isfile(config_path):
> return get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path, cross_compile)[1]
> - else:
> - raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch')
> +
> + options = [f[:-3] for f in os.listdir(QEMU_CONFIGS_DIR) if f.endswith('.py')]
> + raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch, options are ' + str(sorted(options)))
>
> def get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path: str,
> cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> Tuple[
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> index cad37a98e599..2ae72f04cbe0 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> @@ -289,6 +289,10 @@ class LinuxSourceTreeTest(unittest.TestCase):
> pass
> kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir)
>
> + def test_invalid_arch(self):
> + with self.assertRaisesRegex(kunit_kernel.ConfigError, 'not a valid arch, options are.*x86_64'):
> + kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', arch='invalid')
> +
> # TODO: add more test cases.
>
>
>
> base-commit: 865a0a8025ee0b54d1cc74834c57197d184a441e
> --
> 2.33.0.685.g46640cef36-goog
>
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 5:23 PM David Gow <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:26 AM Daniel Latypov <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Consider this attempt to run KUnit in QEMU:
> > $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch=x86
> >
> > Before you'd get this error message:
> > kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch
> >
> > After:
> > kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch, options are ['alpha', 'arm', 'arm64', 'i386', 'powerpc', 'riscv', 's390', 'sparc', 'x86_64']
> >
> > This should make it a bit easier for people to notice when they make
> > typos, etc. Currently, one would have to dive into the python code to
> > figure out what the valid set is.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
> > ---
>
> This is really nice, particularly given that we've had to reproduce
> that list in lots of talks, documentation, etc. and it could get
> out-of-date.
>
> Reviewed-by: David Gow <[email protected]>
>
> [FYI: this didn't seem to apply cleanly to kselftest/kunit head, but
> it was a pretty minor issue with kunit_tool_test.py.]
Oh, this is on top of
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/[email protected]/
I guess this line there
- tree = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir)
+ kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir)
tripped things up a bit.
>
> Thanks,
> -- David
>
> > tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 5 +++--
> > tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 4 ++++
> > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> > index 1870e75ff153..a6b3cee3f0d0 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py
> > @@ -198,8 +198,9 @@ def get_source_tree_ops(arch: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> LinuxSourceT
> > return LinuxSourceTreeOperationsUml(cross_compile=cross_compile)
> > elif os.path.isfile(config_path):
> > return get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path, cross_compile)[1]
> > - else:
> > - raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch')
> > +
> > + options = [f[:-3] for f in os.listdir(QEMU_CONFIGS_DIR) if f.endswith('.py')]
> > + raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch, options are ' + str(sorted(options)))
> >
> > def get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path: str,
> > cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> Tuple[
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > index cad37a98e599..2ae72f04cbe0 100755
> > --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > @@ -289,6 +289,10 @@ class LinuxSourceTreeTest(unittest.TestCase):
> > pass
> > kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir)
> >
> > + def test_invalid_arch(self):
> > + with self.assertRaisesRegex(kunit_kernel.ConfigError, 'not a valid arch, options are.*x86_64'):
> > + kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', arch='invalid')
> > +
> > # TODO: add more test cases.
> >
> >
> >
> > base-commit: 865a0a8025ee0b54d1cc74834c57197d184a441e
> > --
> > 2.33.0.685.g46640cef36-goog
> >
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 4:26 PM Daniel Latypov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Consider this attempt to run KUnit in QEMU:
> $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch=x86
>
> Before you'd get this error message:
> kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch
>
> After:
> kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch, options are ['alpha', 'arm', 'arm64', 'i386', 'powerpc', 'riscv', 's390', 'sparc', 'x86_64']
>
> This should make it a bit easier for people to notice when they make
> typos, etc. Currently, one would have to dive into the python code to
> figure out what the valid set is.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
Yes! Thank you for fixing this!
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <[email protected]>