E.g. specifying this would run suites with "list" in their name.
kunit.filter_glob=list*
Note: the executor prints out a TAP header that includes the number of
suites we intend to run.
So unless we want to report empty results for filtered-out suites, we
need to do the filtering here in the executor.
It's also probably better in the executor since we most likely don't
want any filtering to apply to tests built as modules.
This code does add a CONFIG_GLOB=y dependency for CONFIG_KUNIT=y.
But the code seems light enough that it shouldn't be an issue.
For now, we only filter on suite names so we don't have to create copies
of the suites themselves, just the array (of arrays) holding them.
The name is rather generic since in the future, we could consider
extending it to a syntax like:
kunit.filter_glob=<suite_glob>.<test_glob>
E.g. to run all the del list tests
kunit.filter_glob=list-kunit-test.*del*
But at the moment, it's far easier to manually comment out test cases in
test files as opposed to messing with sets of Kconfig entries to select
specific suites.
So even just doing this makes using kunit far less annoying.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
---
lib/kunit/Kconfig | 1 +
lib/kunit/executor.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
2 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/Kconfig b/lib/kunit/Kconfig
index 00909e6a2443..0b5dfb001bac 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/Kconfig
+++ b/lib/kunit/Kconfig
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
menuconfig KUNIT
tristate "KUnit - Enable support for unit tests"
+ select GLOB if KUNIT=y
help
Enables support for kernel unit tests (KUnit), a lightweight unit
testing and mocking framework for the Linux kernel. These tests are
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c
index a95742a4ece7..25a891285816 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/executor.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
#include <kunit/test.h>
+#include <linux/glob.h>
+#include <linux/moduleparam.h>
/*
* These symbols point to the .kunit_test_suites section and are defined in
@@ -11,14 +13,79 @@ extern struct kunit_suite * const * const __kunit_suites_end[];
#if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_KUNIT)
-static void kunit_print_tap_header(void)
+static char *filter_glob;
+module_param(filter_glob, charp, 0);
+
+static struct kunit_suite * const *
+kunit_filter_subsuite(struct kunit_suite * const * const subsuite)
+{
+ int i, n = 0;
+ struct kunit_suite **filtered;
+
+ n = 0;
+ for (i = 0; subsuite[i] != NULL; ++i) {
+ if (glob_match(filter_glob, subsuite[i]->name))
+ ++n;
+ }
+
+ if (n == 0)
+ return NULL;
+
+ filtered = kmalloc_array(n + 1, sizeof(*filtered), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!filtered)
+ return NULL;
+
+ n = 0;
+ for (i = 0; subsuite[i] != NULL; ++i) {
+ if (glob_match(filter_glob, subsuite[i]->name))
+ filtered[n++] = subsuite[i];
+ }
+ filtered[n] = NULL;
+
+ return filtered;
+}
+
+struct suite_set {
+ struct kunit_suite * const * const *start;
+ struct kunit_suite * const * const *end;
+};
+
+static struct suite_set kunit_filter_suites(void)
+{
+ int i;
+ struct kunit_suite * const **copy, * const *filtered_subsuite;
+ struct suite_set filtered;
+
+ const size_t max = __kunit_suites_end - __kunit_suites_start;
+
+ if (!filter_glob) {
+ filtered.start = __kunit_suites_start;
+ filtered.end = __kunit_suites_end;
+ return filtered;
+ }
+
+ copy = kmalloc_array(max, sizeof(*filtered.start), GFP_KERNEL);
+ filtered.start = copy;
+ if (!copy) { /* won't be able to run anything, return an empty set */
+ filtered.end = copy;
+ return filtered;
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < max; ++i) {
+ filtered_subsuite = kunit_filter_subsuite(__kunit_suites_start[i]);
+ if (filtered_subsuite)
+ *copy++ = filtered_subsuite;
+ }
+ filtered.end = copy;
+ return filtered;
+}
+
+static void kunit_print_tap_header(struct suite_set *suite_set)
{
struct kunit_suite * const * const *suites, * const *subsuite;
int num_of_suites = 0;
- for (suites = __kunit_suites_start;
- suites < __kunit_suites_end;
- suites++)
+ for (suites = suite_set->start; suites < suite_set->end; suites++)
for (subsuite = *suites; *subsuite != NULL; subsuite++)
num_of_suites++;
@@ -30,12 +97,18 @@ int kunit_run_all_tests(void)
{
struct kunit_suite * const * const *suites;
- kunit_print_tap_header();
+ struct suite_set suite_set = kunit_filter_suites();
+
+ kunit_print_tap_header(&suite_set);
+
+ for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
+ __kunit_test_suites_init(*suites);
- for (suites = __kunit_suites_start;
- suites < __kunit_suites_end;
- suites++)
- __kunit_test_suites_init(*suites);
+ if (filter_glob) { /* a copy was made of each array */
+ for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
+ kfree(suites);
+ kfree(suite_set.start);
+ }
return 0;
}
--
2.30.0.365.g02bc693789-goog
Hi Daniel,
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Daniel-Latypov/kunit-support-running-subsets-of-test-suites-from/20210204-074405
base: 88bb507a74ea7d75fa49edd421eaa710a7d80598
config: x86_64-randconfig-m001-20210202 (attached as .config)
compiler: gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-15) 9.3.0
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
smatch warnings:
lib/kunit/executor.c:110 kunit_run_all_tests() error: double free of 'suite_set.start'
vim +110 lib/kunit/executor.c
8c0d884986ba22 Brendan Higgins 2020-08-04 96 int kunit_run_all_tests(void)
aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 97 {
aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 98 struct kunit_suite * const * const *suites;
aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 99
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 100 struct suite_set suite_set = kunit_filter_suites();
45dcbb6f5ef78b Brendan Higgins 2020-08-04 101
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 102 kunit_print_tap_header(&suite_set);
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 103
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 104 for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 105 __kunit_test_suites_init(*suites);
aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 106
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 107 if (filter_glob) { /* a copy was made of each array */
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 108 for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This will free "suite_set.start" will in the first iteration through the
loop
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 109 kfree(suites);
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 @110 kfree(suite_set.start);
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and then double free it.
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 111 }
d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 112
aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 113 return 0;
aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 114 }
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 11:13 PM Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Daniel-Latypov/kunit-support-running-subsets-of-test-suites-from/20210204-074405
> base: 88bb507a74ea7d75fa49edd421eaa710a7d80598
> config: x86_64-randconfig-m001-20210202 (attached as .config)
> compiler: gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-15) 9.3.0
>
> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
>
> smatch warnings:
> lib/kunit/executor.c:110 kunit_run_all_tests() error: double free of 'suite_set.start'
>
> vim +110 lib/kunit/executor.c
>
> 8c0d884986ba22 Brendan Higgins 2020-08-04 96 int kunit_run_all_tests(void)
> aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 97 {
> aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 98 struct kunit_suite * const * const *suites;
> aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 99
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 100 struct suite_set suite_set = kunit_filter_suites();
> 45dcbb6f5ef78b Brendan Higgins 2020-08-04 101
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 102 kunit_print_tap_header(&suite_set);
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 103
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 104 for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
> aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 105 __kunit_test_suites_init(*suites);
> aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 106
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 107 if (filter_glob) { /* a copy was made of each array */
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 108 for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> This will free "suite_set.start" will in the first iteration through the
> loop
Ah, the loop is supposed to contain `kfree(*suites)`.
I'll fix the patch and resend.
I'm not familiar with conventions but it feels like adding Reported-by
on the amended patch would almost imply the report suggested the need
for the ability to filter suites.
So I'll add an informal attribution in the cover letter.
Thanks!
>
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 109 kfree(suites);
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 @110 kfree(suite_set.start);
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> and then double free it.
>
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 111 }
> d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 112
> aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 113 return 0;
> aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 114 }
>
> ---
> 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
> https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:30:43AM -0800, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 11:13 PM Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Daniel-Latypov/kunit-support-running-subsets-of-test-suites-from/20210204-074405
> > base: 88bb507a74ea7d75fa49edd421eaa710a7d80598
> > config: x86_64-randconfig-m001-20210202 (attached as .config)
> > compiler: gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-15) 9.3.0
> >
> > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
> >
> > smatch warnings:
> > lib/kunit/executor.c:110 kunit_run_all_tests() error: double free of 'suite_set.start'
> >
> > vim +110 lib/kunit/executor.c
> >
> > 8c0d884986ba22 Brendan Higgins 2020-08-04 96 int kunit_run_all_tests(void)
> > aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 97 {
> > aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 98 struct kunit_suite * const * const *suites;
> > aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 99
> > d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 100 struct suite_set suite_set = kunit_filter_suites();
> > 45dcbb6f5ef78b Brendan Higgins 2020-08-04 101
> > d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 102 kunit_print_tap_header(&suite_set);
> > d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 103
> > d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 104 for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
> > aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 105 __kunit_test_suites_init(*suites);
> > aac35468ca20a3 Alan Maguire 2020-08-04 106
> > d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 107 if (filter_glob) { /* a copy was made of each array */
> > d5554dd78a454b Daniel Latypov 2021-02-03 108 for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > This will free "suite_set.start" will in the first iteration through the
> > loop
>
> Ah, the loop is supposed to contain `kfree(*suites)`.
> I'll fix the patch and resend.
>
> I'm not familiar with conventions but it feels like adding Reported-by
> on the amended patch would almost imply the report suggested the need
> for the ability to filter suites.
> So I'll add an informal attribution in the cover letter.
>
> Thanks!
These emails are autogenerated by the kbuild bot and I just look them
over and hit forward.
regards,
dan carpenter