[v12,12/18] kunit: test: add tests for KUnit managed resources
diff mbox series

Message ID 20190812182421.141150-13-brendanhiggins@google.com
State Superseded
Headers show
Series
  • kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework
Related show

Commit Message

Brendan Higgins Aug. 12, 2019, 6:24 p.m. UTC
From: Avinash Kondareddy <akndr41@gmail.com>

Add unit tests for KUnit managed resources. KUnit managed resources
(struct kunit_resource) are resources that are automatically cleaned up
at the end of a KUnit test, similar to the concept of devm_* managed
resources.

Signed-off-by: Avinash Kondareddy <akndr41@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
---
 kunit/test-test.c | 225 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 225 insertions(+)

Comments

Stephen Boyd Aug. 13, 2019, 4:31 a.m. UTC | #1
Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-08-12 11:24:15)
> +
> +static int kunit_resource_test_init(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +       struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx =
> +                       kzalloc(sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL);
> +
> +       if (!ctx)
> +               return -ENOMEM;

Should this use the test assertion logic to make sure that it's not
failing allocations during init? BTW, maybe kunit allocation APIs should
fail the test if they fail to allocate in general. Unless we're unit
testing failure to allocate problems.

> +
> +       test->priv = ctx;
> +
> +       kunit_init_test(&ctx->test, "test_test_context");
> +
> +       return 0;
Brendan Higgins Aug. 13, 2019, 7:57 a.m. UTC | #2
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 9:31 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-08-12 11:24:15)
> > +
> > +static int kunit_resource_test_init(struct kunit *test)
> > +{
> > +       struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx =
> > +                       kzalloc(sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +
> > +       if (!ctx)
> > +               return -ENOMEM;
>
> Should this use the test assertion logic to make sure that it's not
> failing allocations during init?

Yep. Will fix.

> BTW, maybe kunit allocation APIs should
> fail the test if they fail to allocate in general. Unless we're unit
> testing failure to allocate problems.

Yeah, I thought about that. I wasn't sure how people would feel about
it, and I thought it would be a pain to tease out all the issues
arising from aborting in different contexts when someone might not
expect it.

I am thinking later we can have kunit_kmalloc_or_abort variants? And
then we can punt this issue to a later time?

> > +
> > +       test->priv = ctx;
> > +
> > +       kunit_init_test(&ctx->test, "test_test_context");
> > +
> > +       return 0;
Stephen Boyd Aug. 13, 2019, 5:07 p.m. UTC | #3
Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-08-13 00:57:33)
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 9:31 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > BTW, maybe kunit allocation APIs should
> > fail the test if they fail to allocate in general. Unless we're unit
> > testing failure to allocate problems.
> 
> Yeah, I thought about that. I wasn't sure how people would feel about
> it, and I thought it would be a pain to tease out all the issues
> arising from aborting in different contexts when someone might not
> expect it.
> 
> I am thinking later we can have kunit_kmalloc_or_abort variants? And
> then we can punt this issue to a later time?
> 

Sure. Sounds good.

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/kunit/test-test.c b/kunit/test-test.c
index 058f3fb37458a..725f1486376fa 100644
--- a/kunit/test-test.c
+++ b/kunit/test-test.c
@@ -101,3 +101,228 @@  static struct kunit_suite kunit_try_catch_test_suite = {
 	.test_cases = kunit_try_catch_test_cases,
 };
 kunit_test_suite(kunit_try_catch_test_suite);
+
+/*
+ * Context for testing test managed resources
+ * is_resource_initialized is used to test arbitrary resources
+ */
+struct kunit_test_resource_context {
+	struct kunit test;
+	bool is_resource_initialized;
+	int allocate_order[2];
+	int free_order[2];
+};
+
+static int fake_resource_init(struct kunit_resource *res, void *context)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = context;
+
+	res->allocation = &ctx->is_resource_initialized;
+	ctx->is_resource_initialized = true;
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void fake_resource_free(struct kunit_resource *res)
+{
+	bool *is_resource_initialized = res->allocation;
+
+	*is_resource_initialized = false;
+}
+
+static void kunit_resource_test_init_resources(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = test->priv;
+
+	kunit_init_test(&ctx->test, "testing_test_init_test");
+
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, list_empty(&ctx->test.resources));
+}
+
+static void kunit_resource_test_alloc_resource(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = test->priv;
+	struct kunit_resource *res;
+	kunit_resource_free_t free = fake_resource_free;
+
+	res = kunit_alloc_and_get_resource(&ctx->test,
+					   fake_resource_init,
+					   fake_resource_free,
+					   GFP_KERNEL,
+					   ctx);
+
+	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, res);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test,
+			    &ctx->is_resource_initialized,
+			    (bool *) res->allocation);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, list_is_last(&res->node, &ctx->test.resources));
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, free, res->free);
+}
+
+static void kunit_resource_test_free_resource(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = test->priv;
+	struct kunit_resource *res = kunit_alloc_and_get_resource(
+			&ctx->test,
+			fake_resource_init,
+			fake_resource_free,
+			GFP_KERNEL,
+			ctx);
+
+	kunit_free_resource(&ctx->test, res);
+
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, ctx->is_resource_initialized);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, list_empty(&ctx->test.resources));
+}
+
+static void kunit_resource_test_cleanup_resources(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	int i;
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = test->priv;
+	struct kunit_resource *resources[5];
+
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(resources); i++) {
+		resources[i] = kunit_alloc_and_get_resource(&ctx->test,
+							    fake_resource_init,
+							    fake_resource_free,
+							    GFP_KERNEL,
+							    ctx);
+	}
+
+	kunit_cleanup(&ctx->test);
+
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, list_empty(&ctx->test.resources));
+}
+
+static void kunit_resource_test_mark_order(int order_array[],
+					   size_t order_size,
+					   int key)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < order_size && order_array[i]; i++)
+		;
+
+	order_array[i] = key;
+}
+
+#define KUNIT_RESOURCE_TEST_MARK_ORDER(ctx, order_field, key)		       \
+		kunit_resource_test_mark_order(ctx->order_field,	       \
+					       ARRAY_SIZE(ctx->order_field),   \
+					       key)
+
+static int fake_resource_2_init(struct kunit_resource *res, void *context)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = context;
+
+	KUNIT_RESOURCE_TEST_MARK_ORDER(ctx, allocate_order, 2);
+
+	res->allocation = ctx;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void fake_resource_2_free(struct kunit_resource *res)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = res->allocation;
+
+	KUNIT_RESOURCE_TEST_MARK_ORDER(ctx, free_order, 2);
+}
+
+static int fake_resource_1_init(struct kunit_resource *res, void *context)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = context;
+
+	kunit_alloc_and_get_resource(&ctx->test,
+				     fake_resource_2_init,
+				     fake_resource_2_free,
+				     GFP_KERNEL,
+				     ctx);
+
+	KUNIT_RESOURCE_TEST_MARK_ORDER(ctx, allocate_order, 1);
+
+	res->allocation = ctx;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void fake_resource_1_free(struct kunit_resource *res)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = res->allocation;
+
+	KUNIT_RESOURCE_TEST_MARK_ORDER(ctx, free_order, 1);
+}
+
+/*
+ * TODO(brendanhiggins@google.com): replace the arrays that keep track of the
+ * order of allocation and freeing with strict mocks using the IN_SEQUENCE macro
+ * to assert allocation and freeing order when the feature becomes available.
+ */
+static void kunit_resource_test_proper_free_ordering(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = test->priv;
+
+	/* fake_resource_1 allocates a fake_resource_2 in its init. */
+	kunit_alloc_and_get_resource(&ctx->test,
+				     fake_resource_1_init,
+				     fake_resource_1_free,
+				     GFP_KERNEL,
+				     ctx);
+
+	/*
+	 * Since fake_resource_2_init calls KUNIT_RESOURCE_TEST_MARK_ORDER
+	 * before returning to fake_resource_1_init, it should be the first to
+	 * put its key in the allocate_order array.
+	 */
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ctx->allocate_order[0], 2);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ctx->allocate_order[1], 1);
+
+	kunit_cleanup(&ctx->test);
+
+	/*
+	 * Because fake_resource_2 finishes allocation before fake_resource_1,
+	 * fake_resource_1 should be freed first since it could depend on
+	 * fake_resource_2.
+	 */
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ctx->free_order[0], 1);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ctx->free_order[1], 2);
+}
+
+static int kunit_resource_test_init(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx =
+			kzalloc(sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL);
+
+	if (!ctx)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	test->priv = ctx;
+
+	kunit_init_test(&ctx->test, "test_test_context");
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void kunit_resource_test_exit(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = test->priv;
+
+	kunit_cleanup(&ctx->test);
+	kfree(ctx);
+}
+
+static struct kunit_case kunit_resource_test_cases[] = {
+	KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_init_resources),
+	KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_alloc_resource),
+	KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_free_resource),
+	KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_cleanup_resources),
+	KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_proper_free_ordering),
+	{}
+};
+
+static struct kunit_suite kunit_resource_test_suite = {
+	.name = "kunit-resource-test",
+	.init = kunit_resource_test_init,
+	.exit = kunit_resource_test_exit,
+	.test_cases = kunit_resource_test_cases,
+};
+kunit_test_suite(kunit_resource_test_suite);