On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 2:37 AM Isabella Basso isabbasso@riseup.net wrote:
We refactored the lib/test_hash.c file into KUnit as part of the student group LKCAMP [1] introductory hackathon for kernel development.
This test was pointed to our group by Daniel Latypov [2], so its full conversion into a pure KUnit test was our goal in this patch series, but we ran into many problems relating to it not being split as unit tests, which complicated matters a bit, as the reasoning behind the original tests is quite cryptic for those unfamiliar with hash implementations.
Some interesting developments we'd like to highlight are:
- In patch 1/5 we noticed that there was an unused define directive that could be removed.
- In patch 4/5 we noticed how stringhash and hash tests are all under the lib/test_hash.c file, which might cause some confusion, and we also broke those kernel config entries up.
Overall KUnit developments have been made in the other patches in this series:
In patches 2/5, 3/5 and 5/5 we refactored the lib/test_hash.c file so as to make it more compatible with the KUnit style, whilst preserving the original idea of the maintainer who designed it (i.e. George Spelvin), which might be undesirable for unit tests, but we assume it is enough for a first patch.
This is our first patch series so we hope our contributions are interesting and also hope to get some useful criticism from the community. :)
Changes since v2:
- Added comments on struct elements.
- Removed unecessary __init bits from KUnit test functions.
- Change KUnit's "EXPECT_FALSE"s for "EXPECT_EQ"s.
Changes since v1:
- Fixed compilation on parisc and m68k.
- Fixed whitespace mistakes.
- Renamed a few functions.
- Refactored globals into struct for test function params, thus removing a patch.
- Reworded some commit messages.
[1] - https://lkcamp.dev/ [2] - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/CAGS_qxojszgM19u=3HLwFgKX5bm5KhywvsS...
This series still works fine for me, and is still:
Tested-by: David Gow davidgow@google.com Reviewed-by: David Gow davidgow@google.com
Hopefully we can get this in soon!
Thanks, -- David