linux/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py, branch v6.3

kunit: tool: make parser preserve whitespace when printing test log

2022-12-12T21:13:48Z

Currently, kunit_parser.py is stripping all leading whitespace to make parsing easier. But this means we can't accurately show kernel output for failing tests or when the kernel crashes. Embarassingly, this affects even KUnit's own output, e.g. [13:40:46] Expected 2 + 1 == 2, but [13:40:46] 2 + 1 == 3 (0x3) [13:40:46] not ok 1 example_simple_test [13:40:46] [FAILED] example_simple_test After this change, here's what the output in context would look like [13:40:46] =================== example (4 subtests) =================== [13:40:46] # example_simple_test: initializing [13:40:46] # example_simple_test: EXPECTATION FAILED at lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c:29 [13:40:46] Expected 2 + 1 == 2, but [13:40:46] 2 + 1 == 3 (0x3) [13:40:46] [FAILED] example_simple_test [13:40:46] [SKIPPED] example_skip_test [13:40:46] [SKIPPED] example_mark_skipped_test [13:40:46] [PASSED] example_all_expect_macros_test [13:40:46] # example: initializing suite [13:40:46] # example: pass:1 fail:1 skip:2 total:4 [13:40:46] # Totals: pass:1 fail:1 skip:2 total:4 [13:40:46] ===================== [FAILED] example ===================== This example shows one minor cosmetic defect this approach has. The test counts lines prevent us from dedenting the suite-level output. But at the same time, any form of non-KUnit output would do the same unless it happened to be indented as well. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: don't include KTAP headers and the like in the test log

2022-12-12T21:13:47Z

We print the "test log" on failure. This is meant to be all the kernel output that happened during the test. But we also include the special KTAP lines in it, which are often redundant. E.g. we include the "not ok" line in the log, right before we print that the test case failed... [13:51:48] Expected 2 + 1 == 2, but [13:51:48] 2 + 1 == 3 (0x3) [13:51:48] not ok 1 example_simple_test [13:51:48] [FAILED] example_simple_test More full example after this patch: [13:51:48] =================== example (4 subtests) =================== [13:51:48] # example_simple_test: initializing [13:51:48] # example_simple_test: EXPECTATION FAILED at lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c:29 [13:51:48] Expected 2 + 1 == 2, but [13:51:48] 2 + 1 == 3 (0x3) [13:51:48] [FAILED] example_simple_test Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: parse KTAP compliant test output

2022-12-12T21:13:47Z

Change the KUnit parser to be able to parse test output that complies with the KTAP version 1 specification format found here: https://kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/ktap.html. Ensure the parser is able to parse tests with the original KUnit test output format as well. KUnit parser now accepts any of the following test output formats: Original KUnit test output format: TAP version 14 1..1 # Subtest: kunit-test-suite 1..3 ok 1 - kunit_test_1 ok 2 - kunit_test_2 ok 3 - kunit_test_3 # kunit-test-suite: pass:3 fail:0 skip:0 total:3 # Totals: pass:3 fail:0 skip:0 total:3 ok 1 - kunit-test-suite KTAP version 1 test output format: KTAP version 1 1..1 KTAP version 1 1..3 ok 1 kunit_test_1 ok 2 kunit_test_2 ok 3 kunit_test_3 ok 1 kunit-test-suite New KUnit test output format (changes made in the next patch of this series): KTAP version 1 1..1 KTAP version 1 # Subtest: kunit-test-suite 1..3 ok 1 kunit_test_1 ok 2 kunit_test_2 ok 3 kunit_test_3 # kunit-test-suite: pass:3 fail:0 skip:0 total:3 # Totals: pass:3 fail:0 skip:0 total:3 ok 1 kunit-test-suite Signed-off-by: Rae Moar Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: tweak error message when no KTAP found

2022-12-12T21:13:47Z

We currently tell people we "couldn't find any KTAP output" with no indication as to what this might mean. After this patch, we get: $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py parse /dev/null ============================================================ [ERROR] Test: : Could not find any KTAP output. Did any KUnit tests run? ============================================================ Testing complete. Ran 0 tests: errors: 1 Note: we could try and generate a more verbose message like > Please check .kunit/test.log to see the raw kernel output. or the like, but we'd need to know what the build dir was to know where test.log actually lives. This patch tries to make a more minimal improvement. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: remove redundant file.close() call in unit test

2022-12-12T21:13:47Z

We're using a `with` block above, so the file object is already closed. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: unit tests all check parser errors, standardize formatting a bit

2022-12-12T21:13:47Z

Let's verify that the parser isn't reporting any errors for valid inputs. This change also * does result.status checking on one line * makes sure we consistently do it outside of the `with` block Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: make TestCounts a dataclass

2022-12-12T21:13:47Z

Since we're using Python 3.7+, we can use dataclasses to tersen the code. It also lets us create pre-populated TestCounts() objects and compare them in our unit test. (Before, you could only create empty ones). Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: print summary of failed tests if a few failed out of a lot

2022-10-31T08:47:37Z

E.g. all the hw_breakpoint tests are failing right now. So if I run `kunit.py run --altests --arch=x86_64`, then I see > Testing complete. Ran 408 tests: passed: 392, failed: 9, skipped: 7 Seeing which 9 tests failed out of the hundreds is annoying. If my terminal doesn't have scrollback support, I have to resort to looking at `.kunit/test.log` for the `not ok` lines. Teach kunit.py to print a summarized list of failures if the # of tests reachs an arbitrary threshold (>=100 tests). To try and keep the output from being too long/noisy, this new logic a) just reports "parent_test failed" if every child test failed b) won't print anything if there are >10 failures (also arbitrary). With this patch, we get an extra line of output showing: > Testing complete. Ran 408 tests: passed: 392, failed: 9, skipped: 7 > Failures: hw_breakpoint This also works with parameterized tests, e.g. if I add a fake failure > Failures: kcsan.test_atomic_builtins_missing_barrier.threads=6 Note: we didn't have enough tests for this to be a problem before. But with commit 980ac3ad0512 ("kunit: tool: rename all_test_uml.config, use it for --alltests"), --alltests works and thus running >100 tests will probably become more common. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: make unit test not print parsed testdata to stdout

2022-10-31T08:47:07Z

Currently, if you run $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py you'll see a lot of output from the parser as we feed it testdata. This makes the output hard to read and fairly confusing, esp. since our testdata includes example failures, which get printed out in red. Silence that output so real failures are easier to see. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan

kunit: tool: rename all_test_uml.config, use it for --alltests

2022-09-30T19:22:55Z

Context: 1. all_tests_uml.config used to be UML specific back when users to manually specify CONFIG_VIRTIO_UML=y to enable CONFIG_PCI=y. 2. --alltests used allyesconfig along with a curated list of options to disable. It's only ever worked for brief periods of time and has perennially been broken due to compile issues. Now all_tests_uml.config should work across ~all architectures. Let's instead use this to implement --alltests. Note: if anyone was using all_tests_uml.config, this change breaks them. I think that's unlikely since it was added in 5.19 and was a lot to type: --kunitconfig=tools/testing/kunit/configs/all_tests_uml.config. We could make it a symlink to the new name, but I don't think the caution is warranted here. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov Reviewed-by: David Gow Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan