Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191010023931.230475-1-yzaikin@google.com> <2f2ea7b0-f683-1cdd-f3f2-ecdf44cb4a97@linuxfoundation.org>
 <CAAXuY3qtSHENgy3S168_03ju_JwAucOAt5WEJGQ+pi5PfurP6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFd5g46RcFV0FACuoF=jCSLzf7UFmEYn4gddaijUZ+zR_CFZBQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191011131902.GC16225@mit.edu> <CAFd5g45s1-=Z4JwJn4A1VDGu4oEGBisQ_0RFp4otUU3rKf1XpQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1e6611e6-2fa6-6f7d-bc7f-0bc2243d9342@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20191017120833.GA25548@mit.edu> <957434b6-32cc-487f-f48e-f9c4416b3f60@linuxfoundation.org>
 <CAAXuY3r7Eu+o-td8MRvexGYmONPgd8FvHr+7mF84Q4ni1G3URg@mail.gmail.com>
 <40073fc9-1de1-9253-e2f9-9cf9ee4308d4@linuxfoundation.org>
 <CAAXuY3r7QKSuwVYDQhF8-zC75ZRVHr+4pzpGXeNbPaEdbM3h4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF977D00C3@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com>
 <CAAXuY3oS=fzH0hpdjUpp_tUyypfAs=TaJxtw9L2=feUkLH2sUA@mail.gmail.com> <ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF977D013C@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com>
In-Reply-To: <ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF977D013C@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com>
From:   Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 17 Oct 2019 18:06:54 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAXuY3pkZuMXbeASjbiuzg8-j+7dV7yUrW1D7WhHqb1UyC0Dww@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v2] ext4: add kunit test for decoding
 extended timestamps
To:     "Bird, Timothy" <Tim.Bird@sony.com>
Cc:     Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        adilger.kernel@dilger.ca,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> Having a data-driven test can, in some circumstances, allow one
> to more easily come up with additional interesting test cases.
Let's try to break this request down:
1. You would like first-class support for parameterized tests, as they
are commonly called,
instead of the ad-hoc thing I did because this is all upstream KUnit has atm.
Me too!
2. You would like a way to pass the data to the parameterized test
other than hardcoding.
Depending on how parameterizing is designed, the input part may or may
not belong in KUnit.
As an example we have a test which has custom code that does
essentially "ls dir" and passes
the list of input files as the list of parameters to the test
framework and then each individual test
has the code to read the file passed as the parameterized test's
parameter. This is not the most
elegant example but it's the quickest I could come up offhand the
point being to demonstrate
what can potentially belong in the core test framework what can be
external to it.