Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] kunit: support failure from dynamic analysis tools
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@google.com>,
        Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardo@google.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
References: <20210311152314.3814916-1-dlatypov@google.com>
 <20210311152314.3814916-2-dlatypov@google.com>
 <CAFd5g46fy_9mPH6AihwUf5GW7aTJ=ecvmD0S266EKtNtweSOcg@mail.gmail.com>
 <16fe1cc0-5819-986d-9065-433a80783edb@linuxfoundation.org>
 <CAGS_qxozjVfeOa42Y+v7dB0s6Ucvf8yHhRxDpficEJ9MGE-orw@mail.gmail.com>
 <3774e8c7-4183-d627-8c53-16bdc0bed6eb@linuxfoundation.org>
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <570d4758-8891-2423-fd37-92f69fbb2e1d@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 2 Apr 2021 15:47:36 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3774e8c7-4183-d627-8c53-16bdc0bed6eb@linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 4/2/21 3:44 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 4/2/21 3:25 PM, Daniel Latypov wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 10:53 AM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/2/21 2:55 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 7:23 AM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardo@google.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Add a kunit_fail_current_test() function to fail the currently running
>>>>> test, if any, with an error message.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is largely intended for dynamic analysis tools like UBSAN and for
>>>>> fakes.
>>>>> E.g. say I had a fake ops struct for testing and I wanted my `free`
>>>>> function to complain if it was called with an invalid argument, or
>>>>> caught a double-free. Most return void and have no normal means of
>>>>> signalling failure (e.g. super_operations, iommu_ops, etc.).
>>>>>
>>>>> Key points:
>>>>> * Always update current->kunit_test so anyone can use it.
>>>>>     * commit 83c4e7a0363b ("KUnit: KASAN Integration") only updated 
>>>>> it for
>>>>>     CONFIG_KASAN=y
>>>>>
>>>>> * Create a new header <kunit/test-bug.h> so non-test code doesn't have
>>>>> to include all of <kunit/test.h> (e.g. lib/ubsan.c)
>>>>>
>>>>> * Forward the file and line number to make it easier to track down
>>>>> failures
>>>>>
>>>>> * Declare the helper function for nice __printf() warnings about 
>>>>> mismatched
>>>>> format strings even when KUnit is not enabled.
>>>>>
>>>>> Example output from kunit_fail_current_test("message"):
>>>>> [15:19:34] [FAILED] example_simple_test
>>>>> [15:19:34]     # example_simple_test: initializing
>>>>> [15:19:34]     # example_simple_test: 
>>>>> lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c:24: message
>>>>> [15:19:34]     not ok 1 - example_simple_test
>>>>>
>>>>> Co-developed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardo@google.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Please run checkpatch on your patches in the future. I am seeing
>>> a few checkpatch readability type improvements that can be made.
>>>
>>> Please make changes and send v2 with Brendan's Reviewed-by.
>>
>> Thanks for the catch.
>> checkpatch.pl --strict should now be happy (aside from complaining
>> about line wrapping)
>>
>> v5 here: 
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20210402212131.835276-1-dlatypov@google.com 
>>
>>
>> Note: Brendan didn't give an explicit Reviewed-by on the second patch,
>> not sure if that was intentional.
>>
> 
> No worries. I applied this one as well. I was able to fix it with just
> checkpatch --fix option.
> 

Clarification. Applied 1/2 - I will wait for Brendan's ack on 2/2

thanks,
-- Shuah