diff mbox series

[1/5] kunit: unify module and builtin suite definitions

Message ID 20220618090310.1174932-2-davidgow@google.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series Rework KUnit test execution in modules | expand

Commit Message

David Gow June 18, 2022, 9:03 a.m. UTC 
From: Jeremy Kerr <jk@codeconstruct.com.au>

Currently, KUnit runs built-in tests and tests loaded from modules
differently. For built-in tests, the kunit_test_suite{,s}() macro adds a
list of suites in the .kunit_test_suites linker section. However, for
kernel modules, a module_init() function is used to run the test suites.

This causes problems if tests are included in a module which already
defines module_init/exit_module functions, as they'll conflict with the
kunit-provided ones.

This change removes the kunit-defined module inits, and instead parses
the kunit tests from their own section in the module. After module init,
we call __kunit_test_suites_init() on the contents of that section,
which prepares and runs the suite.

This essentially unifies the module- and non-module kunit init formats.

Signed-off-by: Jeremy Kerr <jk@codeconstruct.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
---

This is essentially the patch at:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/101d12fc9250b7a445ff50a9e7a25cd74d0e16eb.camel@codeconstruct.com.au/
I've basically just rebased it, tweaked some wording, and it made it
still compile when CONFIG_MODULES is not set.


 include/kunit/test.h   | 47 ++++----------------------------------
 include/linux/module.h |  5 ++++
 kernel/module/main.c   |  6 +++++
 lib/kunit/test.c       | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 4 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)

Comments

kernel test robot June 18, 2022, 11:36 a.m. UTC | #1 
Hi David,

I love your patch! Yet something to improve:

[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[cannot apply to mcgrof/modules-next joel-aspeed/for-next ulf-hansson-mmc-mirror/next]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]

url:    https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/David-Gow/Rework-KUnit-test-execution-in-modules/20220618-170653
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git 4b35035bcf80ddb47c0112c4fbd84a63a2836a18
config: s390-allmodconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220618/202206181950.qNG3jcE8-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: s390-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.3.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
        wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
        chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
        # https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commit/14ff6ae01a41e301f1409874dd5aa38f73bc96f5
        git remote add linux-review https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux
        git fetch --no-tags linux-review David-Gow/Rework-KUnit-test-execution-in-modules/20220618-170653
        git checkout 14ff6ae01a41e301f1409874dd5aa38f73bc96f5
        # save the config file
        mkdir build_dir && cp config build_dir/.config
        COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-11.3.0 make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=s390 SHELL=/bin/bash lib/kunit/

If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag where applicable
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

   lib/kunit/test.c: In function 'kunit_module_init':
>> lib/kunit/test.c:618:28: error: 'struct module' has no member named 'num_kunit_suites'
     618 |         for (i = 0; i < mod->num_kunit_suites; i++)
         |                            ^~
>> lib/kunit/test.c:619:45: error: 'struct module' has no member named 'kunit_suites'
     619 |                 __kunit_test_suites_init(mod->kunit_suites[i]);
         |                                             ^~
   lib/kunit/test.c: In function 'kunit_module_exit':
   lib/kunit/test.c:626:28: error: 'struct module' has no member named 'num_kunit_suites'
     626 |         for (i = 0; i < mod->num_kunit_suites; i++)
         |                            ^~
   lib/kunit/test.c:627:45: error: 'struct module' has no member named 'kunit_suites'
     627 |                 __kunit_test_suites_exit(mod->kunit_suites[i]);
         |                                             ^~


vim +618 lib/kunit/test.c

   612	
   613	#ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
   614	static void kunit_module_init(struct module *mod)
   615	{
   616		unsigned int i;
   617	
 > 618		for (i = 0; i < mod->num_kunit_suites; i++)
 > 619			__kunit_test_suites_init(mod->kunit_suites[i]);
   620	}
   621
kernel test robot June 18, 2022, 12:47 p.m. UTC | #2 
Hi David,

I love your patch! Yet something to improve:

[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v5.19-rc2 next-20220617]
[cannot apply to mcgrof/modules-next joel-aspeed/for-next ulf-hansson-mmc-mirror/next]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]

url:    https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/David-Gow/Rework-KUnit-test-execution-in-modules/20220618-170653
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git 4b35035bcf80ddb47c0112c4fbd84a63a2836a18
config: riscv-randconfig-r034-20220617 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220618/202206182025.UNVY0coI-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 91688716ba49942051dccdf7b9c4f81a7ec8feaf)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
        wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
        chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
        # install riscv cross compiling tool for clang build
        # apt-get install binutils-riscv-linux-gnu
        # https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commit/14ff6ae01a41e301f1409874dd5aa38f73bc96f5
        git remote add linux-review https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux
        git fetch --no-tags linux-review David-Gow/Rework-KUnit-test-execution-in-modules/20220618-170653
        git checkout 14ff6ae01a41e301f1409874dd5aa38f73bc96f5
        # save the config file
        mkdir build_dir && cp config build_dir/.config
        COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=riscv SHELL=/bin/bash lib/kunit/

If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag where applicable
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

>> lib/kunit/test.c:618:23: error: no member named 'num_kunit_suites' in 'struct module'
           for (i = 0; i < mod->num_kunit_suites; i++)
                           ~~~  ^
>> lib/kunit/test.c:619:33: error: no member named 'kunit_suites' in 'struct module'
                   __kunit_test_suites_init(mod->kunit_suites[i]);
                                            ~~~  ^
   lib/kunit/test.c:626:23: error: no member named 'num_kunit_suites' in 'struct module'
           for (i = 0; i < mod->num_kunit_suites; i++)
                           ~~~  ^
   lib/kunit/test.c:627:33: error: no member named 'kunit_suites' in 'struct module'
                   __kunit_test_suites_exit(mod->kunit_suites[i]);
                                            ~~~  ^
   4 errors generated.


vim +618 lib/kunit/test.c

   612	
   613	#ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
   614	static void kunit_module_init(struct module *mod)
   615	{
   616		unsigned int i;
   617	
 > 618		for (i = 0; i < mod->num_kunit_suites; i++)
 > 619			__kunit_test_suites_init(mod->kunit_suites[i]);
   620	}
   621
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h
index 8ffcd7de9607..54306271cfbf 100644
--- a/include/kunit/test.h
+++ b/include/kunit/test.h
@@ -250,41 +250,8 @@  static inline int kunit_run_all_tests(void)
 }
 #endif /* IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_KUNIT) */
 
-#ifdef MODULE
-/**
- * kunit_test_suites_for_module() - used to register one or more
- *			 &struct kunit_suite with KUnit.
- *
- * @__suites: a statically allocated list of &struct kunit_suite.
- *
- * Registers @__suites with the test framework. See &struct kunit_suite for
- * more information.
- *
- * If a test suite is built-in, module_init() gets translated into
- * an initcall which we don't want as the idea is that for builtins
- * the executor will manage execution.  So ensure we do not define
- * module_{init|exit} functions for the builtin case when registering
- * suites via kunit_test_suites() below.
- */
-#define kunit_test_suites_for_module(__suites)				\
-	static int __init kunit_test_suites_init(void)			\
-	{								\
-		return __kunit_test_suites_init(__suites);		\
-	}								\
-	module_init(kunit_test_suites_init);				\
-									\
-	static void __exit kunit_test_suites_exit(void)			\
-	{								\
-		return __kunit_test_suites_exit(__suites);		\
-	}								\
-	module_exit(kunit_test_suites_exit)
-#else
-#define kunit_test_suites_for_module(__suites)
-#endif /* MODULE */
-
 #define __kunit_test_suites(unique_array, unique_suites, ...)		       \
 	static struct kunit_suite *unique_array[] = { __VA_ARGS__, NULL };     \
-	kunit_test_suites_for_module(unique_array);			       \
 	static struct kunit_suite **unique_suites			       \
 	__used __section(".kunit_test_suites") = unique_array
 
@@ -294,16 +261,12 @@  static inline int kunit_run_all_tests(void)
  *
  * @__suites: a statically allocated list of &struct kunit_suite.
  *
- * Registers @suites with the test framework. See &struct kunit_suite for
- * more information.
- *
- * When builtin,  KUnit tests are all run via executor; this is done
- * by placing the array of struct kunit_suite * in the .kunit_test_suites
- * ELF section.
+ * Registers @suites with the test framework.
+ * This is done by placing the array of struct kunit_suite * in the
+ * .kunit_test_suites ELF section.
  *
- * An alternative is to build the tests as a module.  Because modules do not
- * support multiple initcall()s, we need to initialize an array of suites for a
- * module.
+ * When builtin, KUnit tests are all run via the executor at boot, and when
+ * built as a module, they run on module load.
  *
  */
 #define kunit_test_suites(__suites...)						\
diff --git a/include/linux/module.h b/include/linux/module.h
index abd9fa916b7d..e3cd6c325794 100644
--- a/include/linux/module.h
+++ b/include/linux/module.h
@@ -505,6 +505,11 @@  struct module {
 	int num_static_call_sites;
 	struct static_call_site *static_call_sites;
 #endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_KUNIT
+	int num_kunit_suites;
+	struct kunit_suite ***kunit_suites;
+#endif
+
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_LIVEPATCH
 	bool klp; /* Is this a livepatch module? */
diff --git a/kernel/module/main.c b/kernel/module/main.c
index fed58d30725d..4542db7cdf54 100644
--- a/kernel/module/main.c
+++ b/kernel/module/main.c
@@ -2087,6 +2087,12 @@  static int find_module_sections(struct module *mod, struct load_info *info)
 					      sizeof(*mod->static_call_sites),
 					      &mod->num_static_call_sites);
 #endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_KUNIT
+	mod->kunit_suites = section_objs(info, ".kunit_test_suites",
+					      sizeof(*mod->kunit_suites),
+					      &mod->num_kunit_suites);
+#endif
+
 	mod->extable = section_objs(info, "__ex_table",
 				    sizeof(*mod->extable), &mod->num_exentries);
 
diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c
index a5053a07409f..3052526b9b89 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/test.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/test.c
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ 
 #include <kunit/test.h>
 #include <kunit/test-bug.h>
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
 #include <linux/moduleparam.h>
 #include <linux/sched/debug.h>
 #include <linux/sched.h>
@@ -609,6 +610,49 @@  void __kunit_test_suites_exit(struct kunit_suite **suites)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__kunit_test_suites_exit);
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
+static void kunit_module_init(struct module *mod)
+{
+	unsigned int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < mod->num_kunit_suites; i++)
+		__kunit_test_suites_init(mod->kunit_suites[i]);
+}
+
+static void kunit_module_exit(struct module *mod)
+{
+	unsigned int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < mod->num_kunit_suites; i++)
+		__kunit_test_suites_exit(mod->kunit_suites[i]);
+}
+
+static int kunit_module_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val,
+			       void *data)
+{
+	struct module *mod = data;
+
+	switch (val) {
+	case MODULE_STATE_LIVE:
+		kunit_module_init(mod);
+		break;
+	case MODULE_STATE_GOING:
+		kunit_module_exit(mod);
+		break;
+	case MODULE_STATE_COMING:
+	case MODULE_STATE_UNFORMED:
+		break;
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static struct notifier_block kunit_mod_nb = {
+	.notifier_call = kunit_module_notify,
+	.priority = 0,
+};
+#endif
+
 struct kunit_kmalloc_array_params {
 	size_t n;
 	size_t size;
@@ -703,13 +747,19 @@  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_cleanup);
 static int __init kunit_init(void)
 {
 	kunit_debugfs_init();
-
+#ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
+	return register_module_notifier(&kunit_mod_nb);
+#else
 	return 0;
+#endif
 }
 late_initcall(kunit_init);
 
 static void __exit kunit_exit(void)
 {
+#ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
+	unregister_module_notifier(&kunit_mod_nb);
+#endif
 	kunit_debugfs_cleanup();
 }
 module_exit(kunit_exit);