Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 18 Oct 2019 12:29:49 +0000
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        Matthias Maennich <maennich@google.com>
Cc:     shuah@kernel.org, john.johansen@canonical.com, jmorris@namei.org,
        serge@hallyn.com, keescook@chromium.org, alan.maguire@oracle.com,
        yzaikin@google.com, davidgow@google.com, tytso@mit.edu,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
        Mike Salvatore <mike.salvatore@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v1] apparmor: add AppArmor KUnit
 tests for policy unpack
Message-ID: <20191018122949.GD11244@42.do-not-panic.com>
References: <20191018001816.94460-1-brendanhiggins@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191018001816.94460-1-brendanhiggins@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 05:18:16PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> From: Mike Salvatore <mike.salvatore@canonical.com>
> 
> In order to write the tests against the policy unpacking code, some
> static functions needed to be exposed for testing purposes. One of the
> goals of this patch is to establish a pattern for which testing these
> kinds of functions should be done in the future.

And you'd run into the same situation expressed elsewhere with kunit of
an issue of the kunit test as built-in working but if built as a module
then it would not work, given the lack of exports. Symbols namespaces
should resolve this [0], and we'd be careful where a driver imports this
namespace.

[0] https://lwn.net/Articles/798254/

  Luis