kunit: Annotate _MSG assertion variants with gnu printf specifiers

KUnit's assertion macros have variants which accept a printf format
string, to allow tests to specify a more detailed message on failure.
These (and the related KUNIT_FAIL() macro) ultimately wrap the
__kunit_do_failed_assertion() function, which accepted a printf format
specifier, but did not have the __printf attribute, so gcc couldn't warn
on incorrect agruments.

It turns out there were quite a few tests with such incorrect arguments.

Add the __printf() specifier now that we've fixed these errors, to
prevent them from recurring.

Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Reviewed-by: Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: add parameter generation macro using description from array

The existing KUNIT_ARRAY_PARAM macro requires a separate function to
get the description. However, in a lot of cases the description can
just be copied directly from the array. Add a second macro that
avoids having to write a static function just for a single strscpy.

Signed-off-by: Benjamin Berg <benjamin.berg@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Link: https://msgid.link/20231220151952.415232-2-benjamin@sipsolutions.net
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>

kunit: Protect string comparisons against NULL

Add NULL checks to KUNIT_BINARY_STR_ASSERTION() so that it will fail
cleanly if either pointer is NULL, instead of causing a NULL pointer
dereference in the strcmp().

A test failure could be that a string is unexpectedly NULL. This could
be trapped by KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL() but that would terminate the test
at that point. It's preferable that the KUNIT_EXPECT_STR*() macros can
handle NULL pointers as a failure.

Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: add is_init test attribute

Add is_init test attribute of type bool. Add to_string, get, and filter
methods to lib/kunit/attributes.c.

Mark each of the tests in the init section with the is_init=true attribute.

Add is_init to the attributes documentation.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: add KUNIT_INIT_TABLE to init linker section

Add KUNIT_INIT_TABLE to the INIT_DATA linker section.

Alter the KUnit macros to create init tests:
kunit_test_init_section_suites

Update lib/kunit/executor.c to run both the suites in KUNIT_TABLE and
KUNIT_INIT_TABLE.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Use string_stream for test log

Replace the fixed-size log buffer with a string_stream so that the
log can grow as lines are added.

The existing kunit log tests have been updated for using a
string_stream as the log. No new test have been added because there
are already tests for the underlying string_stream.

As the log tests now depend on string_stream functions they cannot
build when kunit-test is a module. They have been surrounded by
a #if to replace them with skipping version when the test is
build as a module. Though this isn't pretty, it avoids moving
code to another file while that code is also being changed.

Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kernel.h: split out COUNT_ARGS() and CONCATENATE() to args.h

Patch series "kernel.h: Split out a couple of macros to args.h", v4.

There are macros in kernel.h that can be used outside of that header.
Split them to args.h and replace open coded variants.


This patch (of 4):

kernel.h is being used as a dump for all kinds of stuff for a long time.
The COUNT_ARGS() and CONCATENATE() macros may be used in some places
without need of the full kernel.h dependency train with it.

Here is the attempt on cleaning it up by splitting out these macros().

While at it, include new header where it's being used.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230718211147.18647-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230718211147.18647-2-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com> [PCI]
Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>
Cc: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>

kunit: Allow kunit test modules to use test filtering

External tools, e.g., Intel GPU tools (IGT), support execution of
individual selftests provided by kernel modules. That could be also
applicable to kunit test modules if they provided test filtering. But
test filtering is now possible only when kunit code is built into the
kernel. Moreover, a filter can be specified only at boot time, then
reboot is required each time a different filter is needed.

Build the test filtering code also when kunit is configured as a module,
expose test filtering functions to other kunit source files, and use them
in kunit module notifier callback functions. Userspace can then reload
the kunit module with a value of the filter_glob parameter tuned to a
specific kunit test module every time it wants to limit the scope of tests
executed on that module load. Make the kunit.filter* parameters visible
in sysfs for user convenience.

v5: Refresh on tpp of attributes filtering fix
v4: Refresh on top of newly applied attributes patches and changes
introdced by new versions of other patches submitted in series with
this one.
v3: Fix CONFIG_GLOB, required by filtering functions, not selected when
building as a module (lkp@intel.com).
v2: Fix new name of a structure moved to kunit namespace not updated
across all uses (lkp@intel.com).

Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Make 'list' action available to kunit test modules

Results from kunit tests reported via dmesg may be interleaved with other
kernel messages. When parsing dmesg for modular kunit results in real
time, external tools, e.g., Intel GPU tools (IGT), may want to insert
their own test name markers into dmesg at the start of each test, before
any kernel message related to that test appears there, so existing upper
level test result parsers have no doubt which test to blame for a specific
kernel message. Unfortunately, kunit reports names of tests only at their
completion (with the exeption of a not standarized "# Subtest: <name>"
header above a test plan of each test suite or parametrized test).

External tools could be able to insert their own "start of the test"
markers with test names included if they new those names in advance.
Test names could be learned from a list if provided by a kunit test
module.

There exists a feature of listing kunit tests without actually executing
them, but it is now limited to configurations with the kunit module built
in and covers only built-in tests, already available at boot time.
Moreover, switching from list to normal mode requires reboot. If that
feature was also available when kunit is built as a module, userspace
could load the module with action=list parameter, load some kunit test
modules they are interested in and learn about the list of tests provided
by those modules, then unload them, reload the kunit module in normal mode
and execute the tests with their lists already known.

Extend kunit module notifier initialization callback with a processing
path for only listing the tests provided by a module if the kunit action
parameter is set to "list" or "list_attr". For user convenience, make the
kunit.action parameter visible in sysfs.

v2: Don't use a different format, use kunit_exec_list_tests() (Rae),
- refresh on top of new attributes patches, handle newly introduced
kunit.action=list_attr case (Rae).

Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Report the count of test suites in a module

According to KTAP specification[1], results should always start from a
header that provides a TAP protocol version, followed by a test plan with
a count of items to be executed. That pattern should be followed at each
nesting level. In the current implementation of the top-most, i.e., test
suite level, those rules apply only for test suites built into the kernel,
executed and reported on boot. Results submitted to dmesg from kunit test
modules loaded later are missing those top-level headers.

As a consequence, if a kunit test module provides more than one test suite
then, without the top level test plan, external tools that are parsing
dmesg for kunit test output are not able to tell how many test suites
should be expected and whether to continue parsing after complete output
from the first test suite is collected.

Submit the top-level headers also from the kunit test module notifier
initialization callback.

v3: Fix new name of a structure moved to kunit namespace not updated in
executor_test functions (lkp@intel.com).
v2: Use kunit_exec_run_tests() (Mauro, Rae), but prevent it from
emitting the headers when called on load of non-test modules.

[1] https://docs.kernel.org/dev-tools/ktap.html#

Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
Cc: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Add module attribute

Add module attribute to the test attribute API. This attribute stores the
module name associated with the test using KBUILD_MODNAME.

The name of a test suite and the module name often do not match. A
reference to the module name associated with the suite could be extremely
helpful in running tests as modules without needing to check the codebase.

This attribute will be printed for each suite.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Add speed attribute

Add speed attribute to the test attribute API. This attribute will allow
users to mark tests with a category of speed.

Currently the categories of speed proposed are: normal, slow, and very_slow
(outlined in enum kunit_speed). These are outlined in the enum kunit_speed.

The assumed default speed for tests is "normal". This indicates that the
test takes a relatively trivial amount of time (less than 1 second),
regardless of the machine it is running on. Any test slower than this could
be marked as "slow" or "very_slow".

Add the macro KUNIT_CASE_SLOW to set a test as slow, as this is likely a
common use of the attributes API.

Add an example of marking a slow test to kunit-example-test.c.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Add test attributes API structure

Add the basic structure of the test attribute API to KUnit, which can be
used to save and access test associated data.

Add attributes.c and attributes.h to hold associated structs and functions
for the API.

Create a struct that holds a variety of associated helper functions for
each test attribute. These helper functions will be used to get the
attribute value, convert the value to a string, and filter based on the
value. This struct is flexible by design to allow for attributes of
numerous types and contexts.

Add a method to print test attributes in the format of "# [<test_name if
not suite>.]<attribute_name>: <attribute_value>".

Example for a suite: "# speed: slow"

Example for a test case: "# test_case.speed: very_slow"

Use this method to report attributes in the KTAP output (KTAP spec:
https://docs.kernel.org/dev-tools/ktap.html) and _list_tests output when
kernel's new kunit.action=list_attr option is used. Note this is derivative
of the kunit.action=list option.

In test.h, add fields and associated helper functions to test cases and
suites to hold user-inputted test attributes.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Move kunit_abort() call out of kunit_do_failed_assertion()

KUnit aborts the current thread when an assertion fails. Currently, this
is done conditionally as part of the kunit_do_failed_assertion()
function, but this hides the kunit_abort() call from the compiler
(particularly if it's in another module). This, in turn, can lead to
both suboptimal code generation (the compiler can't know if
kunit_do_failed_assertion() will return), and to static analysis tools
like smatch giving false positives.

Moving the kunit_abort() call into the macro should give the compiler
and tools a better chance at understanding what's going on. Doing so
requires exporting kunit_abort(), though it's recommended to continue to
use assertions in lieu of aborting directly.

In addition, kunit_abort() and kunit_do_failed_assertion() are renamed
to make it clear they they're intended for internal KUnit use, to:
__kunit_do_failed_assertion() and __kunit_abort()

Suggested-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Update kunit_print_ok_not_ok function

There is no need use opaque test_or_suite pointer and is_test flag
as we don't use anything from the suite struct. Always expect test
pointer and use NULL as indication that provided results are from
the suite so we can treat them differently.

Since results could be from nested tests, like parameterized tests,
add explicit level parameter to properly indent output messages and
thus allow to reuse this function from other places.

While around, remove small code duplication near skip directive.

Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Cc: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: kmalloc_array: Use kunit_add_action()

The kunit_add_action() function is much simpler and cleaner to use that
the full KUnit resource API for simple things like the
kunit_kmalloc_array() functionality.

Replacing it allows us to get rid of a number of helper functions, and
leaves us with no uses of kunit_alloc_resource(), which has some
usability problems and is going to have its behaviour modified in an
upcoming patch.

Note that we need to use kunit_defer_trigger_all() to implement
kunit_kfree().

Reviewed-by: Benjamin Berg <benjamin.berg@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
Tested-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

Documentation: kunit: Warn that exit functions run even if init fails

KUnit's exit functions will run even if the corresponding init function
fails. It's easy, when writing an exit function, to assume the init
function succeeded, and (for example) access uninitialised memory or
dereference NULL pointers.

Note that this case exists and should be handled in the documentation.

Suggested-by: Benjamin Berg <benjamin@sipsolutions.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/a39af0400abedb2e9b31d84c37551cecc3eed0e1.camel@sipsolutions.net/
Reviewed-by: Sadiya Kazi <sadiyakazi@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: increase KUNIT_LOG_SIZE to 2048 bytes

The s390 specific test_unwind kunit test has 39 parameterized tests. The
results in debugfs are truncated since the full log doesn't fit into 1500
bytes.
Therefore increase KUNIT_LOG_SIZE to 2048 bytes in a similar way like it
was done recently with commit "kunit: fix bug in debugfs logs of
parameterized tests". With that the whole test result is present.

Reported-by: Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: fix bug of extra newline characters in debugfs logs

Fix bug of the extra newline characters in debugfs logs. When a
line is added to debugfs with a newline character at the end,
an extra line appears in the debugfs log.

This is due to a discrepancy between how the lines are printed and how they
are added to the logs. Remove this discrepancy by checking if a newline
character is present before adding a newline character. This should closely
match the printk behavior.

Add kunit_log_newline_test to provide test coverage for this issue. (Also,
move kunit_log_test above suite definition to remove the unnecessary
declaration prior to the suite definition)

As an example, say we add these two lines to the log:

kunit_log(..., "KTAP version 1\n");
kunit_log(..., "1..1");

The debugfs log before this fix:

KTAP version 1

1..1

The debugfs log after this fix:

KTAP version 1
1..1

Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: fix bug in debugfs logs of parameterized tests

Fix bug in debugfs logs that causes individual parameterized results to not
appear because the log is reinitialized (cleared) when each parameter is
run.

Ensure these results appear in the debugfs logs, increase log size to
allow for the size of parameterized results. As a result, append lines to
the log directly rather than using an intermediate variable that can cause
stack size warnings due to the increased log size.

Here is the debugfs log of ext4_inode_test which uses parameterized tests
before the fix:

KTAP version 1

# Subtest: ext4_inode_test
1..1
# Totals: pass:16 fail:0 skip:0 total:16
ok 1 ext4_inode_test

As you can see, this log does not include any of the individual
parametrized results.

After (in combination with the next two fixes to remove extra empty line
and ensure KTAP valid format):

KTAP version 1
1..1
KTAP version 1
# Subtest: ext4_inode_test
1..1
KTAP version 1
# Subtest: inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding
ok 1 1901-12-13 Lower bound of 32bit < 0 timestamp, no extra bits
... (the rest of the individual parameterized tests)
ok 16 2446-05-10 Upper bound of 32bit >=0 timestamp. All extra
# inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding: pass:16 fail:0 skip:0 total:16
ok 1 inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding
# Totals: pass:16 fail:0 skip:0 total:16
ok 1 ext4_inode_test

Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: fix kunit_test_init_section_suites(...)

Looks like kunit_test_init_section_suites(...) was messed up in a merge
conflict. This fixes it.

kunit_test_init_section_suites(...) was not updated to avoid the extra
level of indirection when .kunit_test_suites was flattened. Given no-one
was actively using it, this went unnoticed for a long period of time.

Fixes: e5857d396f35 ("kunit: flatten kunit_suite*** to kunit_suite** in .kunit_test_suites")
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Tested-by: Martin Fernandez <martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: fix bug in KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ

In KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ, add check if one of the
inputs is NULL and fail if this is the case.

Currently, the kernel crashes if one of the inputs is NULL. Instead,
fail the test and add an appropriate error message.

Fixes: b8a926bea8b1 ("kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros")

This was found by the kernel test robot:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/202212191448.D6EDPdOh-lkp@intel.com/

Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>

Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Provide a static key to check if KUnit is actively running tests

KUnit does a few expensive things when enabled. This hasn't been a
problem because KUnit was only enabled on test kernels, but with a few
people enabling (but not _using_) KUnit on production systems, we need a
runtime way of handling this.

Provide a 'kunit_running' static key (defaulting to false), which allows
us to hide any KUnit code behind a static branch. This should reduce the
performance impact (on other code) of having KUnit enabled to a single
NOP when no tests are running.

Note that, while it looks unintuitive, tests always run entirely within
__kunit_test_suites_init(), so it's safe to decrement the static key at
the end of this function, rather than in __kunit_test_suites_exit(),
which is only there to clean up results in debugfs.

Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: remove KUNIT_INIT_MEM_ASSERTION macro

Commit 870f63b7cd78 ("kunit: eliminate KUNIT_INIT_*_ASSERT_STRUCT
macros") removed all the other macros of this type.

But it raced with commit b8a926bea8b1 ("kunit: Introduce
KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros"), which added another
instance.

Remove KUNIT_INIT_MEM_ASSERTION and just use the generic
KUNIT_INIT_ASSERT macro instead.
Rename the `size` arg to avoid conflicts by appending a "_" (like we did
in the previous commit).

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: eliminate KUNIT_INIT_*_ASSERT_STRUCT macros

These macros exist because passing an initializer list to other macros
is hard.

The goal of these macros is to generate a line like
struct $ASSERT_TYPE __assertion = $APPROPRIATE_INITIALIZER;
e.g.
struct kunit_unary_assertion __assertion = {
.condition = "foo()",
.expected_true = true
};

But the challenge is you can't pass `{.condition=..., .expect_true=...}`
as a macro argument, since the comma means you're actually passing two
arguments, `{.condition=...` and `.expect_true=....}`.
So we'd made custom macros for each different initializer-list shape.

But we can work around this with the following generic macro
#define KUNIT_INIT_ASSERT(initializers...) { initializers }

Note: this has the downside that we have to rename some macros arguments
to not conflict with the struct field names (e.g. `expected_true`).
It's a bit gross, but probably worth reducing the # of macros.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros

Currently, in order to compare memory blocks in KUnit, the KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ
or KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE macros are used in conjunction with the memcmp
function, such as:
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0);

Although this usage produces correct results for the test cases, when
the expectation fails, the error message is not very helpful,
indicating only the return of the memcmp function.

Therefore, create a new set of macros KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and
KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ that compare memory blocks until a specified size.
In case of expectation failure, those macros print the hex dump of the
memory blocks, making it easier to debug test failures for memory blocks.

That said, the expectation

KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0);

would translate to the expectation

KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, foo, bar, size);

Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: declare kunit_assert structs as const

Everywhere we use the assert structs now takes them via const*, as of
commit 7466886b400b ("kunit: take `kunit_assert` as `const`").

So now let's properly declare the structs as const as well.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: rename base KUNIT_ASSERTION macro to _KUNIT_FAILED

Context:
Currently this macro's name, KUNIT_ASSERTION conflicts with the name of
an enum whose values are {KUNIT_EXPECTATION, KUNIT_ASSERTION}.

It's hard to think of a better name for the enum, so rename this macro.
It's also a bit strange that the macro might do nothing depending on the
boolean argument `pass`. Why not have callers check themselves?

This patch:
Moves the pass/fail checking into the callers of KUNIT_ASSERTION, so now
we only call it when the check has failed.
Then we rename the macro the _KUNIT_FAILED() to reflect the new
semantics.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: remove format func from struct kunit_assert, get it to 0 bytes

Each calll to a KUNIT_EXPECT_*() macro creates a local variable which
contains a struct kunit_assert.

Normally, we'd hope the compiler would be able to optimize this away,
but we've seen cases where it hasn't, see
https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/GbrMNej2BAAJ.

In changes like commit 21957f90b28f ("kunit: split out part of
kunit_assert into a static const"), we've moved more and more parts out
of struct kunit_assert and its children types (kunit_binary_assert).

This patch removes the final field and gets us to:
sizeof(struct kunit_assert) == 0
sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) == 24 (on UML x86_64).

This also reduces the amount of macro plumbing going on at the cost of
passing in one more arg to the base KUNIT_ASSERTION macro and
kunit_do_failed_assertion().

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: no longer call module_info(test, "Y") for kunit modules

Because KUnit test execution is not a guarantee with the kunit.enable
parameter we want to be careful to only taint the kernel when actual
tests run. Calling module_info(test, "Y") for every KUnit module
automatically causes the kernel to be tainted upon module load. Therefore,
we're removing this call and relying on the KUnit framework to taint the
kernel or not.

Signed-off-by: Joe Fradley <joefradley@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: add kunit.enable to enable/disable KUnit test

This patch adds the kunit.enable module parameter that will need to be
set to true in addition to KUNIT being enabled for KUnit tests to run.
The default value is true giving backwards compatibility. However, for
the production+testing use case the new config option
KUNIT_DEFAULT_ENABLED can be set to N requiring the tester to opt-in
by passing kunit.enable=1 to the kernel.

Signed-off-by: Joe Fradley <joefradley@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: fix assert_type for comparison macros

When replacing KUNIT_BINARY_*_MSG_ASSERTION() macros with
KUNIT_BINARY_INT_ASSERTION(), the assert_type parameter was not always
correctly transferred. Specifically, the following errors were
introduced:
- KUNIT_EXPECT_LE_MSG() uses KUNIT_ASSERTION
- KUNIT_ASSERT_LT_MSG() uses KUNIT_EXPECTATION
- KUNIT_ASSERT_GT_MSG() uses KUNIT_EXPECTATION

A failing KUNIT_EXPECT_LE_MSG() test thus prevents further tests from
running, while failing KUNIT_ASSERT_{LT,GT}_MSG() tests do not prevent
further tests from running. This is contrary to the documentation,
which states that failing KUNIT_EXPECT_* macros allow further tests to
run, while failing KUNIT_ASSERT_* macros should prevent this.

Revert the KUNIT_{ASSERTION,EXPECTATION} switches to fix the behaviour
for the affected macros.

Fixes: 40f39777ce4f ("kunit: decrease macro layering for integer asserts")
Signed-off-by: Sander Vanheule <sander@svanheule.net>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: flatten kunit_suite*** to kunit_suite** in .kunit_test_suites

We currently store kunit suites in the .kunit_test_suites ELF section as
a `struct kunit_suite***` (modulo some `const`s).
For every test file, we store a struct kunit_suite** NULL-terminated array.

This adds quite a bit of complexity to the test filtering code in the
executor.

Instead, let's just make the .kunit_test_suites section contain a single
giant array of struct kunit_suite pointers, which can then be directly
manipulated. This array is not NULL-terminated, and so none of the test
filtering code needs to NULL-terminate anything.

Tested-by: Maíra Canal <maira.canal@usp.br>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Co-developed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: unify module and builtin suite definitions

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.

Tested-by: Maíra Canal <maira.canal@usp.br>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: test.h: fix a kernel-doc markup

Fix this kernel-doc warning:

Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/test:9: ./include/kunit/test.h:323: WARNING: Inline interpreted text or phrase reference start-string without end-string.

Functions should use func_name() on kernel-doc markups, as
documented at:
Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst

Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Taint the kernel when KUnit tests are run

Make KUnit trigger the new TAINT_TEST taint when any KUnit test is run.
Due to KUnit tests not being intended to run on production systems, and
potentially causing problems (or security issues like leaking kernel
addresses), the kernel's state should not be considered safe for
production use after KUnit tests are run.

This both marks KUnit modules as test modules using MODULE_INFO() and
manually taints the kernel when tests are run (which catches builtin
tests).

Acked-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Tested-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: take `kunit_assert` as `const`

The `kunit_do_failed_assertion` function passes its
`struct kunit_assert` argument to `kunit_fail`. This one,
in turn, calls its `format` field passing the assert again
as a `const` pointer.

Therefore, the whole chain may be made `const`.

Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: add ability to specify suite-level init and exit functions

KUnit has support for setup/cleanup logic for each test case in a suite.
But it lacks the ability to specify setup/cleanup for the entire suite
itself.

This can be used to do setup that is too expensive or cumbersome to do
for each test.
Or it can be used to do simpler things like log debug information after
the suite completes.
It's a fairly common feature, so the lack of it is noticeable.

Some examples in other frameworks and languages:
* https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.html#setupclass-and-teardownclass
* https://google.github.io/googletest/reference/testing.html#Test::SetUpTestSuite

Meta:
This is very similar to this patch here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20210805043503.20252-3-bvanassche@acm.org/
The changes from that patch:
* pass in `struct kunit *` so users can do stuff like
`kunit_info(suite, "debug message")`
* makes sure the init failure is bubbled up as a failure
* updates kunit-example-test.c to use a suite init
* Updates kunit/usage.rst to mention the new support
* some minor cosmetic things
* use `suite_{init,exit}` instead of `{init/exit}_suite`
* make suite init error message more consistent w/ test init
* etc.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: add support for kunit_suites that reference init code

Add support for a new kind of kunit_suite registration macro called
kunit_test_init_section_suite(); this new registration macro allows the
registration of kunit_suites that reference functions marked __init and
data marked __initdata.

Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Tested-by: Martin Fernandez <martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: split resource API from test.h into new resource.h

Background:
Currently, a reader looking at kunit/test.h will find the file is quite
long, and the first meaty comment is a doc comment about struct
kunit_resource.

Most users will not ever use the KUnit resource API directly.
They'll use kunit_kmalloc() and friends, or decide it's simpler to do
cleanups via labels (it often can be) instead of figuring out how to use
the API.

It's also logically separate from everything else in test.h.
Removing it from the file doesn't cause any compilation errors (since
struct kunit has `struct list_head resources` to store them).

This commit:
Let's move it into a kunit/resource.h file and give it a separate page
in the docs, kunit/api/resource.rst.

We include resource.h at the bottom of test.h since
* don't want to force existing users to add a new include if they use the API
* it accesses `lock` inside `struct kunit` in a inline func
* so we can't just forward declare, and the alternatives require
uninlining the func, adding hepers to lock/unlock, or other more
invasive changes.

Now the first big comment in test.h is about kunit_case, which is a lot
more relevant to what a new user wants to know.

A side effect of this is git blame won't properly track history by
default, users need to run
$ git blame -L ,1 -C17 include/kunit/resource.h

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Introduce _NULL and _NOT_NULL macros

Today, when we want to check if a pointer is NULL and not ERR we have
two options:

KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, ptr == NULL);

or

KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_NE(test, ptr, (struct mystruct *)NULL);

Create a new set of macros that take care of NULL checks.

Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: cleanup assertion macro internal variables

All the operands should be tagged `const`.
We're only assigning them to variables so that we can compare them (e.g.
check if left == right, etc.) and avoid evaluating expressions multiple
times.

There's no need for them to be mutable.

Also rename the helper variable `loc` to `__loc` like we do with
`__assertion` and `__strs` to avoid potential name collisions with user
code.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs

If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and
most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion
from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where
possible [1].

This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type.
That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64.

Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch
factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator
into another static const, saving 16 more bytes.

In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct
(struct kunit_binary_assert) {
.assert = <struct kunit_assert>,
.operation = "==",
.left_text = "2 + 2",
.left_value = 4,
.right_text = "5",
.right_value = 5,
}
After this change
static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = {
.operation = "==",
.left_text = "2 + 2",
.right_text = "5",
};
(struct kunit_binary_assert) {
.assert = <struct kunit_assert>,
.text = &__text,
.left_value = 4,
.right_value = 5,
}

This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated
for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert.

Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right
instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the
macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would
be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`.

[1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: consolidate KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_ASSERT_STRUCT macros

We currently have 2 other versions of KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_ASSERT_STRUCT.
The only differences are that
* the format funcition they pass is different
* the types of left_val/right_val should be different (integral,
pointer, string).

The latter doesn't actually matter since these macros are just plumbing
them along to KUNIT_ASSERTION where they will get type checked.

So combine them all into a single KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_ASSERT_STRUCT that
now also takes the format function as a parameter.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: decrease macro layering for EQ/NE asserts

Introduce KUNIT_BINARY_PTR_ASSERTION to match KUNIT_BINARY_INT_ASSERTION
and make KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_PTREQ use these instead of
shared intermediate macros that only remove the need to type "==" or
"!=".

The current macro chain looks like:
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION
KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_PTR_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION
<ditto for NE and ASSERT>

After this change:
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_INT_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION
KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_PTR_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: decrease macro layering for integer asserts

Introduce a KUNIT_BINARY_INT_ASSERTION for the likes of KUNIT_EXPECT_LT.
This is analagous to KUNIT_BINARY_STR_ASSERTION.

Note: this patch leaves the EQ/NE macros untouched since those share
some intermediate macros for the pointer-based macros.

The current macro chain looks like:
KUNIT_EXPECT_LT_MSG => KUNIT_BASE_LT_MSG_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION
KUNIT_EXPECT_GT_MSG => KUNIT_BASE_GT_MSG_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION
<ditto for LE, GE, and ASSERT variants>

After this change:
KUNIT_EXPECT_LT_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_INT_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION
KUNIT_EXPECT_GT_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_INT_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION

I.e. we've traded all the unique intermediary macros for a single shared
KUNIT_BINARY_INT_ASSERTION. The only difference is that users of
KUNIT_BINARY_INT_ASSERTION also need to pass the operation (==, <, etc.).

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: reduce layering in string assertion macros

The current macro chain looks like:
KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ => KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_STR_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BINARY_STR_ASSERTION.
KUNIT_ASSERT_STREQ => KUNIT_ASSERT_STREQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_STR_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BINARY_STR_ASSERTION.
<ditto for STR_NE>

After this change:
KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ => KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_STR_ASSERTION.
KUNIT_ASSERT_STREQ => KUNIT_ASSERT_STREQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_STR_ASSERTION.
<ditto for STR_NE>

All the intermediate macro did was pass in "==" or "!=", so it seems
better to just drop them at the cost of a bit more copy-paste.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: drop unused intermediate macros for ptr inequality checks

We have the intermediate macros for KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_GT() and friends,
but these macros don't exist.

I can see niche usecases for these macros existing, but since we've been
fine without them for so long, let's drop this dead code.

Users can instead cast the pointers and use the other GT/LT macros.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: make KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() use KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(), etc.

There's quite a few macros in play for KUnit assertions.

The current macro chain looks like:
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION

After this change:
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ => KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ => KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
and we can drop the intermediate KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION.

This change does this for all the other macros as well.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: drop unused assert_type from kunit_assert and clean up macros

This field has been split out from kunit_assert to make the struct less
heavy along with the filename and line number.

This change drops the assert_type field and cleans up all the macros
that were plumbing assert_type into kunit_assert.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const

This is per Linus's suggestion in [1].

The issue there is that every KUNIT_EXPECT/KUNIT_ASSERT puts a
kunit_assert object onto the stack. Normally we rely on compilers to
elide this, but when that doesn't work out, this blows up the stack
usage of kunit test functions.

We can move some data off the stack by making it static.
This change introduces a new `struct kunit_loc` to hold the file and
line number and then just passing assert_type (EXPECT or ASSERT) as an
argument.

In [1], it was suggested to also move out the format string as well, but
users could theoretically craft a format string at runtime, so we can't.

This change leaves a copy of `assert_type` in kunit_assert for now
because cleaning up all the macros to not pass it around is a bit more
involved.

Here's an example of the expanded code for KUNIT_FAIL():
if (__builtin_expect(!!(!(false)), 0)) {
static const struct kunit_loc loc = { .file = ... };
struct kunit_fail_assert __assertion = { .assert = { .type ... };
kunit_do_failed_assertion(test, &loc, KUNIT_EXPECTATION, &__assertion.assert, ...);
};

[1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: drop unused kunit* field in kunit_assert

The `struct kunit* test` field in kunit_assert is unused.
Note: string_stream needs it, but it has its own `test` field. I assume
`test` in `kunit_assert` predates this and was leftover after some
refactoring.

This patch removes the field and cleans up the macros to avoid
needlessly passing around `test`.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: move check if assertion passed into the macros

Currently the code always calls kunit_do_assertion() even though it does
nothing when `pass` is true.

This change moves the `if(!(pass))` check into the macro instead
and renames the function to kunit_do_failed_assertion().
I feel this a bit easier to read and understand.

This has the potential upside of avoiding a function call that does
nothing most of the time (assuming your tests are passing) but comes
with the downside of generating a bit more code and branches. We try to
mitigate the branches by tagging them with `unlikely()`.

This also means we don't have to initialize structs that we don't need,
which will become a tiny bit more expensive if we switch over to using
static variables to try and reduce stack usage. (There's runtime code
to check if the variable has been initialized yet or not).

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

include/kunit/test.h: replace kernel.h with the necessary inclusions

When kernel.h is used in the headers it adds a lot into dependency hell,
especially when there are circular dependencies are involved.

Replace kernel.h inclusion with the list of what is really being used.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20211013170417.87909-4-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

kunit: fix kernel-doc warnings due to mismatched arg names

Commit 7122debb4367 ("kunit: introduce
kunit_kmalloc_array/kunit_kcalloc() helpers") added new functions but
called last arg `flags`, unlike the existing code that used `gfp`.
This only is an issue in test.h, test.c still used `gfp`.

But the documentation was copy-pasted with the old names, leading to
kernel-doc warnings.

Do s/flags/gfp to make the names consistent and fix the warnings.

Fixes: 7122debb4367 ("kunit: introduce kunit_kmalloc_array/kunit_kcalloc() helpers")
Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Support skipped tests

The kunit_mark_skipped() macro marks the current test as "skipped", with
the provided reason. The kunit_skip() macro will mark the test as
skipped, and abort the test.

The TAP specification supports this "SKIP directive" as a comment after
the "ok" / "not ok" for a test. See the "Directives" section of the TAP
spec for details:
https://testanything.org/tap-specification.html#directives

The 'success' field for KUnit tests is replaced with a kunit_status
enum, which can be SUCCESS, FAILURE, or SKIPPED, combined with a
'status_comment' containing information on why a test was skipped.

A new 'kunit_status' test suite is added to test this.

Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Tested-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: introduce kunit_kmalloc_array/kunit_kcalloc() helpers

Add in:
* kunit_kmalloc_array() and wire up kunit_kmalloc() to be a special
case of it.
* kunit_kcalloc() for symmetry with kunit_kzalloc()

This should using KUnit more natural by making it more similar to the
existing *alloc() APIs.

And while we shouldn't necessarily be writing unit tests where overflow
should be a concern, it can't hurt to be safe.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Add gnu_printf specifiers

Some KUnit functions use variable arguments to implement a printf-like
format string. Use the __printf() attribute to let the compiler warn if
invalid format strings are passed in.

If the kernel is build with W=1, it complained about the lack of these
specifiers, e.g.:
../lib/kunit/test.c:72:2: warning: function ‘kunit_log_append’ might be a candidate for ‘gnu_printf’ format attribute [-Wsuggest-attribute=format]

Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Acked-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Assign strings to 'const char*' in STREQ assertions

Currently, the KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() and related macros assign both
string arguments to variables of their own type (via typeof()). This
seems to be to prevent the macro argument from being evaluated multiple
times.

However, this doesn't work if one of these is a fixed-length character
array, rather than a character pointer, as (for example) char[16] will
always allocate a new string.

By always using 'const char*' (the type strcmp expects), we're always
just taking a pointer to the string, which works even with character
arrays.

Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: Do not typecheck binary assertions

The use of typecheck() in KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() and friends is causing more
problems than I think it's worth. Things like enums need to have their
values explicitly cast, and literals all need to be very precisely
typed, else a large warning will be printed.

While typechecking does have its uses, the additional overhead of having
lots of needless casts -- combined with the awkward error messages which
don't mention which types are involved -- makes tests less readable and
more difficult to write.

By removing the typecheck() call, the two arguments still need to be of
compatible types, but don't need to be of exactly the same time, which
seems a less confusing and more useful compromise.

Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: make test->lock irq safe

The upcoming SLUB kunit test will be calling kunit_find_named_resource()
from a context with disabled interrupts. That means kunit's test->lock
needs to be IRQ safe to avoid potential deadlocks and lockdep splats.

This patch therefore changes the test->lock usage to spin_lock_irqsave()
and spin_unlock_irqrestore().

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210511150734.3492-1-glittao@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Oliver Glitta <glittao@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

kunit: Support for Parameterized Testing

Implementation of support for parameterized testing in KUnit. This
approach requires the creation of a test case using the
KUNIT_CASE_PARAM() macro that accepts a generator function as input.

This generator function should return the next parameter given the
previous parameter in parameterized tests. It also provides a macro to
generate common-case generators based on arrays. Generators may also
optionally provide a human-readable description of parameters, which is
displayed where available.

Note, currently the result of each parameter run is displayed in
diagnostic lines, and only the overall test case output summarizes
TAP-compliant success or failure of all parameter runs. In future, when
supported by kunit-tool, these can be turned into subsubtest outputs.

Signed-off-by: Arpitha Raghunandan <98.arpi@gmail.com>
Co-developed-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Tested-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: fix display of failed expectations for strings

Currently the following expectation
KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "hi", "bye");
will produce:
Expected "hi" == "bye", but
"hi" == 1625079497
"bye" == 1625079500

After this patch:
Expected "hi" == "bye", but
"hi" == hi
"bye" == bye

KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_STR_ASSERT_STRUCT() was written but just mistakenly
not actually used by KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() and friends.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Tested-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: test: fix remaining kernel-doc warnings

test.h still produce three warnings:

include/kunit/test.h:282: warning: Function parameter or member '__suites' not described in 'kunit_test_suites_for_module'
include/kunit/test.h:282: warning: Excess function parameter 'suites_list' description in 'kunit_test_suites_for_module'
include/kunit/test.h:314: warning: Excess function parameter 'suites' description in 'kunit_test_suites'

They're all due to errors at kernel-doc markups. Update them.

It should be noticed that this patch moved a kernel-doc
markup that were located at the wrong place, and using a wrong
name. Kernel-doc only supports kaving the markup just before the
function/macro declaration. Placing it elsewhere will make it do
wrong assumptions.

Fixes: aac35468ca20 ("kunit: test: create a single centralized executor for all tests")
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Tested-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

treewide: Convert macro and uses of __section(foo) to __section("foo")

Use a more generic form for __section that requires quotes to avoid
complications with clang and gcc differences.

Remove the quote operator # from compiler_attributes.h __section macro.

Convert all unquoted __section(foo) uses to quoted __section("foo").
Also convert __attribute__((section("foo"))) uses to __section("foo")
even if the __attribute__ has multiple list entry forms.

Conversion done using the script at:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/75393e5ddc272dc7403de74d645e6c6e0f4e70eb.camel@perches.com/2-convert_section.pl

Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@gooogle.com>
Reviewed-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

kunit: test.h: fix a bad kernel-doc markup

As warned by:

./include/kunit/test.h:504: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.

The right way to describe a function is:

name - description

Instead, kunit_remove_resource was using:

name: description

Causing it to be improperly parsed.

Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>

kunit: test.h: solve kernel-doc warnings

There are some warnings there:
./include/kunit/test.h:90: warning: Function parameter or member 'name' not described in 'kunit_resource'
./include/kunit/test.h:353: warning: Function parameter or member 'res' not described in 'kunit_add_resource'
./include/kunit/test.h:367: warning: Function parameter or member 'res' not described in 'kunit_add_named_resource'
./include/kunit/test.h:367: warning: Function parameter or member 'name' not described in 'kunit_add_named_resource'
./include/kunit/test.h:367: warning: Function parameter or member 'data' not described in 'kunit_add_named_resource'
./include/kunit/test.h:367: warning: Excess function parameter 'name_data' description in 'kunit_add_named_resource'

Address them, ensuring that all non-private arguments will
be properly described. With that regards, at struct kunit_resource,
the free argument is described as user-provided. So, this
doesn't seem to belong to the "private" part of the struct.

Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>

KUnit: KASAN Integration

Integrate KASAN into KUnit testing framework.

- Fail tests when KASAN reports an error that is not expected
- Use KUNIT_EXPECT_KASAN_FAIL to expect a KASAN error in KASAN
tests
- Expected KASAN reports pass tests and are still printed when run
without kunit_tool (kunit_tool still bypasses the report due to the
test passing)
- KUnit struct in current task used to keep track of the current
test from KASAN code

Make use of "[PATCH v3 kunit-next 1/2] kunit: generalize kunit_resource
API beyond allocated resources" and "[PATCH v3 kunit-next 2/2] kunit: add
support for named resources" from Alan Maguire [1]

- A named resource is added to a test when a KASAN report is
expected
- This resource contains a struct for kasan_data containing
booleans representing if a KASAN report is expected and if a
KASAN report is found

[1] (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/1583251361-12748-1-git-send-email-alan.maguire@oracle.com/T/#t)

Signed-off-by: Patricia Alfonso <trishalfonso@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Acked-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Cc: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200915035828.570483-3-davidgow@google.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200910070331.3358048-3-davidgow@google.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

init: main: add KUnit to kernel init

Although we have not seen any actual examples where KUnit doesn't work
because it runs in the late init phase of the kernel, it has been a
concern for some time that this could potentially be an issue in the
future. So, remove KUnit from init calls entirely, instead call directly
from kernel_init() so that KUnit runs after late init.

Co-developed-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: test: create a single centralized executor for all tests

Add a centralized executor to dispatch tests rather than relying on
late_initcall to schedule each test suite separately. Centralized
execution is for built-in tests only; modules will execute tests when
loaded.

Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Co-developed-by: Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@google.com>
Co-developed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: add support for named resources

The kunit resources API allows for custom initialization and
cleanup code (init/fini); here a new resource add function sets
the "struct kunit_resource" "name" field, and calls the standard
add function. Having a simple way to name resources is
useful in cases such as multithreaded tests where a set of
resources are shared among threads; a pointer to the
"struct kunit *" test state then is all that is needed to
retrieve and use named resources. Support is provided to add,
find and destroy named resources; the latter two are simply
wrappers that use a "match-by-name" callback.

If an attempt to add a resource with a name that already exists
is made kunit_add_named_resource() will return -EEXIST.

Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: generalize kunit_resource API beyond allocated resources

In its original form, the kunit resources API - consisting the
struct kunit_resource and associated functions - was focused on
adding allocated resources during test operation that would be
automatically cleaned up on test completion.

The recent RFC patch proposing converting KASAN tests to KUnit [1]
showed another potential model - where outside of test context,
but with a pointer to the test state, we wish to access/update
test-related data, but expressly want to avoid allocations.

It turns out we can generalize the kunit_resource to support
static resources where the struct kunit_resource * is passed
in and initialized for us. As part of this work, we also
change the "allocation" field to the more general "data" name,
as instead of associating an allocation, we can associate a
pointer to static data. Static data is distinguished by a NULL
free functions. A test is added to cover using kunit_add_resource()
with a static resource and data.

Finally we also make use of the kernel's krefcount interfaces
to manage reference counting of KUnit resources. The motivation
for this is simple; if we have kernel threads accessing and
using resources (say via kunit_find_resource()) we need to
ensure we do not remove said resources (or indeed free them
if they were dynamically allocated) until the reference count
reaches zero. A new function - kunit_put_resource() - is
added to handle this, and it should be called after a
thread using kunit_find_resource() is finished with the
retrieved resource.

We ensure that the functions needed to look up, use and
drop reference count are "static inline"-defined so that
they can be used by builtin code as well as modules in
the case that KUnit is built as a module.

A cosmetic change here also; I've tried moving to
kunit_[action]_resource() as the format of function names
for consistency and readability.

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/2/26/1286

Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

Documentation: test.h - fix warnings

Fix warnings at 'make htmldocs', and formatting issues in the resulting
documentation.

- test.h: Fix annotation in kernel-doc parameter description.

- Documentation/*.rst: Fixing formatting issues, and a duplicate label
issue due to usage of sphinx.ext.autosectionlabel and identical labels
within one document (sphinx warning)

Signed-off-by: Lothar Rubusch <l.rubusch@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: subtests should be indented 4 spaces according to TAP

Introduce KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT macro which corresponds to 4-space
indentation and KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT macro which corresponds to
8-space indentation in line with TAP spec (e.g. see "Subtests"
section of https://node-tap.org/tap-protocol/).

Use these macros in place of one or two tabs in strings to clarify
why we are indenting.

Suggested-by: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: add debugfs /sys/kernel/debug/kunit/<suite>/results display

add debugfs support for displaying kunit test suite results; this is
especially useful for module-loaded tests to allow disentangling of
test result display from other dmesg events. debugfs support is
provided if CONFIG_KUNIT_DEBUGFS=y.

As well as printk()ing messages, we append them to a per-test log.

Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: allow kunit tests to be loaded as a module

As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute
all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide
a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying

CONFIG_KUNIT=y
CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m

...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests.

To achieve this we need to do the following:

o export the required symbols in kunit
o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip
building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m.
o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface
references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init().
Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions
in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting
module build for that test suite.
o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot
do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro
to declare multiple suites within the same module at once.
o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test"
and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests);
rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test"
and "ext4-inode-test" respectively).

Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites()
as callers in other trees may need the old definition.

Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> # for ext4 bits
Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> # For list-test
Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: fix failure to build without printk

Previously KUnit assumed that printk would always be present, which is
not a valid assumption to make. Fix that by removing call to
vprintk_emit, and calling printk directly.

This fixes a build error[1] reported by Randy.

For context this change comes after much discussion. My first stab[2] at
this was just to make the KUnit logging code compile out; however, it
was agreed that if we were going to use vprintk_emit, then vprintk_emit
should provide a no-op stub, which lead to my second attempt[3]. In
response to me trying to stub out vprintk_emit, Sergey Senozhatsky
suggested a way for me to remove our usage of vprintk_emit, which led to
my third attempt at solving this[4].

In my third version of this patch[4], I completely removed vprintk_emit,
as suggested by Sergey; however, there was a bit of debate over whether
Sergey's solution was the best. The debate arose due to Sergey's version
resulting in a checkpatch warning, which resulted in a debate over
correct printk usage. Joe Perches offered an alternative fix which was
somewhat less far reaching than what Sergey had suggested and
importantly relied on continuing to use %pV. Much of the debated
centered around whether %pV should be widely used, and whether Sergey's
version would result in object size bloat. Ultimately, we decided to go
with Sergey's version.

Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Link[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/c7229254-0d90-d90e-f3df-5b6d6fc0b51f@infradead.org/
Link[2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20190827174932.44177-1-brendanhiggins@google.com/
Link[3]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20190827234835.234473-1-brendanhiggins@google.com/
Link[4]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20190828093143.163302-1-brendanhiggins@google.com/
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Tim.Bird@sony.com
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> # build-tested
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: test: add the concept of assertions

Add support for assertions which are like expectations except the test
terminates if the assertion is not satisfied.

The idea with assertions is that you use them to state all the
preconditions for your test. Logically speaking, these are the premises
of the test case, so if a premise isn't true, there is no point in
continuing the test case because there are no conclusions that can be
drawn without the premises. Whereas, the expectation is the thing you
are trying to prove. It is not used universally in x-unit style test
frameworks, but I really like it as a convention. You could still
express the idea of a premise using the above idiom, but I think
KUNIT_ASSERT_* states the intended idea perfectly.

Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: test: add support for test abort

Add support for aborting/bailing out of test cases, which is needed for
implementing assertions.

An assertion is like an expectation, but bails out of the test case
early if the assertion is not met. The idea with assertions is that you
use them to state all the preconditions for your test. Logically
speaking, these are the premises of the test case, so if a premise isn't
true, there is no point in continuing the test case because there are no
conclusions that can be drawn without the premises. Whereas, the
expectation is the thing you are trying to prove.

Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: test: add the concept of expectations

Add support for expectations, which allow properties to be specified and
then verified in tests.

Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: test: add test resource management API

Create a common API for test managed resources like memory and test
objects. A lot of times a test will want to set up infrastructure to be
used in test cases; this could be anything from just wanting to allocate
some memory to setting up a driver stack; this defines facilities for
creating "test resources" which are managed by the test infrastructure
and are automatically cleaned up at the conclusion of the test.

Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core

Add core facilities for defining unit tests; this provides a common way
to define test cases, functions that execute code which is under test
and determine whether the code under test behaves as expected; this also
provides a way to group together related test cases in test suites (here
we call them test_modules).

Just define test cases and how to execute them for now; setting
expectations on code will be defined later.

Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>