On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 08:44:47PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Drop the doubled word "for".
>
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap
> Cc: Jonathan Corbet
> Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Luis Chamberlain
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
For all the firmware pa
On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 05:36:15PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> Add entry for the new proc sysctl KUnit test to the PROC SYSCTL section.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe
> Acked-by: Luis Chamberla
urii Zaikin
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe
Acked-by: Luis Chamberlain
Luis
___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 05:35:59PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> diff --git a/kunit/test.c b/kunit/test.c
> index c030ba5a43e40..a70fbe449e922 100644
> --- a/kunit/test.c
> +++ b/kunit/test.c
> @@ -122,7 +122,8 @@ static void kunit_print_test_case_ok_not_ok(struct
> kunit_case *test_case,
>
>
On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 05:35:58PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> +struct kunit {
> + void *priv;
> +
> + /* private: internal use only. */
> + const char *name; /* Read only after initialization! */
> + bool success; /* Read only after test_case finishes! */
> +};
No lock
On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 10:52:50AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:53 AM Brendan Higgins
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 4:22 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:02AM -0700, Brendan Higgi
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 01:01:54AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 11:10 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 09:07:43PM -0700, Iurii Zaikin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 7:17 PM Luis Chamberlain
> > &
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 09:07:43PM -0700, Iurii Zaikin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 7:17 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > +static void sysctl_test_dointvec_table_maxlen_unset(struct kunit *test)
> > > +{
> > > + struct ctl_table table = {
> &
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 01:02:55AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 5:01 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:08AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > create mode 100644
> > > tools/testing/kunit/test_data/t
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:41:47PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 4:02 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 03:14:45PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 2:44 PM Luis Chamberlain
> > &g
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 05:07:32PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 3:33 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:25:56AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > +/**
> > > + * module_test() - used to register a kunit_mod
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:17:51PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
> It does not matter whether KUnit provides additional things, relative
> to kselftest. The point I was making is that there appears to be
> _some_ overlap between kselftest and KUnit, and if there is overlap
> then it is worth
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:12AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> From: Iurii Zaikin
>
> KUnit tests for initialized data behavior of proc_dointvec that is
> explicitly checked in the code. Includes basic parsing tests including
> int min/max overflow.
First, thanks for this work! My review
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:08AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> create mode 100644
> tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-all_passed.log
> create mode 100644
> tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-crash.log
> create mode 100644
>
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:02AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> diff --git a/kunit/example-test.c b/kunit/example-test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0..f44b8ece488bb
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/kunit/example-test.c
<-- snip -->
> +/*
> + * This defines a suite or grouping of tests.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 03:41:29PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 3:13 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:01AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > diff --git a/Kconfig b/Kconfig
> > > index 48
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 03:14:45PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 2:44 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > Since its a new architecture and since you seem to imply most tests
> > don't require locking or even IRQs disabled, I think its worth to
> >
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:25:56AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> +/**
> + * module_test() - used to register a kunit_module with KUnit.
> + * @module: a statically allocated kunit_module.
> + *
> + * Registers @module with the test framework. See kunit_module for
> more
> + * information.
>
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:01AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> diff --git a/Kconfig b/Kconfig
> index 48a80beab6853..10428501edb78 100644
> --- a/Kconfig
> +++ b/Kconfig
> @@ -30,3 +30,5 @@ source "crypto/Kconfig"
> source "lib/Kconfig"
>
> source "lib/Kconfig.debug"
> +
> +source
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 04:17:13PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 1:55 PM Kieran Bingham
> wrote:
> Oh, yep, you are right. Does that mean we should bother at all with a
> defconfig?
If one wanted a qemu enabled type of kernel and also for kuniut one
could imply run:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 03:25:04PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-12-10 at 11:22 -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:25:13AM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > > This patch set provides functionality that will help to improve
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:25:13AM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> This patch set provides functionality that will help to improve the
> locality of the async_schedule calls used to provide deferred
> initialization.
>
> This patch set originally started out focused on just the one call to
>
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 03:50:48PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:44 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:28AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > The ultimate goal is to create minimal isolated test binaries;
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 03:48:15PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 5:54 AM Kieran Bingham
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Brendan,
> >
> > Thanks again for this series!
> >
> > On 28/11/2018 19:36, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > The ultimate goal is to create minimal isolated test
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 03:34:57PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:34 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:25AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/um/kernel/trap.c b/arch/um/kernel/trap.c
&
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 03:26:26PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:40 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:24AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > Add a test for string stream along with a simpler example.
> >
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 06:14:17PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:29 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:20AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > A number of test features need to do pretty complicated string pri
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 06:08:36PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:28 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > > +static void kunit_run_case_internal(struct kunit *test,
> > > +
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:18AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> +int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_module *module)
> +{
> + bool all_passed = true, success;
> + struct kunit_case *test_case;
> + struct kunit test;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = kunit_init_test(, module->name);
>
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:51:11PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:14 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:18AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > +#define module_test(module) \
> > > + static i
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 04:32:26PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> Probe devices asynchronously instead of the driver.
> +static void __driver_attach_async_helper(void *_dev, async_cookie_t cookie)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = _dev;
> + struct device_driver *drv;
> +
> +
: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck
Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain
Luis
> ---
> drivers/base/base.h |2 +
> drivers/base/bus.c | 23 ++---
> drivers/base/dd.c | 91
> ---
> 3 files chan
ch the driver later when we
> finally complete the deferred asynchronous probe call.
>
> Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck
Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain
This is the sort of corner case that is best if we had a test case for
it, as it is hard to reproduce
ivers")
> Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche
> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck
Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain
Luis
> ---
> drivers/base/dd.c |6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/d
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:05:34AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:37 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:26:03PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 1:37 PM Brendan Higgins
> > > wrote:
&g
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:33AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> Make UML unflatten any present device trees when running KUnit tests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins
> ---
> arch/um/kernel/um_arch.c | 4
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/um/kernel/um_arch.c
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:56:37PM +, Kieran Bingham wrote:
> Hi Brendan,
>
> Please excuse the top posting, but I'm replying here as I'm following
> the section "Creating a kunitconfig" in Documentation/kunit/start.rst.
>
> Could the three line kunitconfig file live under say
>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:28AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> The ultimate goal is to create minimal isolated test binaries; in the
> meantime we are using UML to provide the infrastructure to run tests, so
> define an abstract way to configure and run tests that allow us to
> change the
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:25AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> +static void segv_run_catcher(jmp_buf *catcher, void *fault_addr)
> +{
> + current->thread.fault_addr = fault_addr;
> + UML_LONGJMP(catcher, 1);
> +}
Some documentation about what this does exactly would be appreciated.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:24AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> Add a test for string stream along with a simpler example.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins
> ---
> kunit/Kconfig | 12 ++
> kunit/Makefile | 4 ++
> kunit/example-test.c | 88
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:26:03PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 1:37 PM Brendan Higgins
> wrote:
> >
> > Make minimum number of changes outside of the KUnit directories for
> > KUnit to build and run using UML.
>
> There's nothing in this patch limiting this to UML.
Not
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:25AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/um/kernel/trap.c b/arch/um/kernel/trap.c
> index cced829460427..bf90e678b3d71 100644
> --- a/arch/um/kernel/trap.c
> +++ b/arch/um/kernel/trap.c
> @@ -201,6 +201,12 @@ void segv_handler(int sig, struct siginfo
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:23AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> Make minimum number of changes outside of the KUnit directories for
> KUnit to build and run using UML.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins
> ---
> Kconfig | 2 ++
> Makefile | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:20AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> A number of test features need to do pretty complicated string printing
> where it may not be possible to rely on a single preallocated string
> with parameters.
>
> So provide a library for constructing the string as you go
> +static void kunit_run_case_internal(struct kunit *test,
> + struct kunit_module *module,
> + struct kunit_case *test_case)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (module->init) {
> + ret = module->init(test);
> +
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:18AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> +#define module_test(module) \
> + static int module_kunit_init##module(void) \
> + { \
> + return kunit_run_tests(); \
> + } \
> +
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 01:50:01PM -0700, shuah wrote:
> On 11/28/18 12:54 PM, Knut Omang wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 17:41 -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > Both approaches provide assertion macros for running tests inside the
> > kernel,
> > I doubt the kernel community would like to see
47 matches
Mail list logo
