Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220606095516.938934-1-jose.exposito89@gmail.com>
 <20220606095516.938934-2-jose.exposito89@gmail.com> <20220606134242.h6kuqn4zbpmc2rql@houat>
 <576ed6ef-b961-9214-2c9b-56cb5b493b4e@redhat.com> <20220606135219.nwhp4fdawg2qjeam@houat>
 <78c1eb65-ea78-8744-5382-ea86a56a66f4@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <78c1eb65-ea78-8744-5382-ea86a56a66f4@redhat.com>
From:   Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Jun 2022 07:19:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGS_qxrPKJrXufMKOCO3eCEpq-Udq6uy32x6aneSPRnm=1O4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] drm/format-helper: Add KUnit tests for drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_rgb332()
To:     Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
Cc:     Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>,
        =?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRXhww7NzaXRv?= <jose.exposito89@gmail.com>,
        davidgow@google.com, tzimmermann@suse.de,
        maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com, airlied@linux.ie,
        daniel@ffwll.ch, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 6:57 AM Javier Martinez Canillas
<javierm@redhat.com> wrote:
>

<snip>

> >>>>  $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --kunitconfig=drivers/gpu/drm \
> >>>>          --kconfig_add CONFIG_VIRTIO_UML=y \
> >>>>          --kconfig_add CONFIG_UML_PCI_OVER_VIRTIO=y
> >>>
> >>> It's not clear to me why you would need VIRTIO here? The Kunit config
> >>> file should be enough to run the tests properly
> >>>
> >>
> >> It's needed or otherwise KUnit will complain with:
> >>
> >> ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --kunitconfig=drivers/gpu/drm/.kunitconfig
> >> [15:47:31] Configuring KUnit Kernel ...
> >> Regenerating .config ...
> >> Populating config with:
> >> $ make ARCH=um O=.kunit olddefconfig
> >> ERROR:root:Not all Kconfig options selected in kunitconfig were in the generated .config.
> >> This is probably due to unsatisfied dependencies.
> >> Missing: CONFIG_DRM=y, CONFIG_DRM_KUNIT_TEST=y
> >> Note: many Kconfig options aren't available on UML. You can try running on a different architecture with something like "--arch=x86_64".
> >>
> >> The following works correctly but it won't use User Mode Linux:
> >>
> >> ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --kunitconfig=drivers/gpu/drm/.kunitconfig --arch=x86_64
> >
> > But then, can't we add them to .kunitconfig?
> >
>
> That's what I asked in the previous RFC too. Daniel mentioned that it shouldn't
> go there because is platform specific (AFAIU, one might want to test it on x86,

Slight correction, it was David who explicitly suggested it shouldn't
go in there.
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2022-June/357611.html

> aarch64, etc) but then I asked why we couldn't have a arch/um/.kunitconfig.
>
> The answer was that's not that simple and some agreement on how to do it is needed:

I'm a bit more in favor of having UML-specific options in the drm
.kunitconfig file, but I agree it's a bit unclear.
If people want to easily run with --arch=x86_64 or others, then
they're indeed a liability.

Another option is to perhaps explicitly name the .kunitconfig file
something like drm/uml.kunitconfig, which doesn't solve the problem
but makes it less of a footgun.

Stepping back, I feel like perhaps a cleaner answer lies in adding a
new Kconfig option that selects CONFIG_UML_PCI_OVER_VIRTIO under UML
and just CONFIG_PCI otherwise.
But that's a bigger discussion still.

Daniel