| Message ID | 20220715040354.2629856-1-davidgow@google.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | d52788b3da2750ebc617891cf260b8f8912f522b |
| Headers | show |
| Series | mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: test: Fix dependencies when KUNIT=m | expand |
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022, at 13:33, David Gow wrote: > While the sdhci-of-aspeed KUnit tests do work when builtin, and do work > when KUnit itself is being built as a module, the two together break. > > This is because the KUnit tests (understandably) depend on KUnit, so a > built-in test cannot build if KUnit is a module. > > Fix this by adding a dependency on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y), > which only excludes this one problematic configuration. > > This was reported on a nasty openrisc-randconfig run by the kernel test > robot, though for some reason (compiler optimisations removing the test > code?) I wasn't able to reproduce it locally on x86: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202207140122.fzhlf60k-lkp@intel.com/T/ > > Fixes: 291cd54e5b05 ("mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: test: Use kunit_test_suite() macro") > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> > --- > drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > index 10c563999d3d..e63608834411 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED > config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED_TEST > bool "Tests for the ASPEED SDHCI driver" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS > depends on MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED && KUNIT > + depends on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y) Should this replace the line above? Isn't it just more constrained? Regardless, thanks for your work here, the kunit integration with the ASPEED SDHCI driver bothered me a lot when I wrote it. Andrew
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 8:45 AM Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 15 Jul 2022, at 13:33, David Gow wrote: > > While the sdhci-of-aspeed KUnit tests do work when builtin, and do work > > when KUnit itself is being built as a module, the two together break. > > > > This is because the KUnit tests (understandably) depend on KUnit, so a > > built-in test cannot build if KUnit is a module. > > > > Fix this by adding a dependency on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y), > > which only excludes this one problematic configuration. > > > > This was reported on a nasty openrisc-randconfig run by the kernel test > > robot, though for some reason (compiler optimisations removing the test > > code?) I wasn't able to reproduce it locally on x86: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202207140122.fzhlf60k-lkp@intel.com/T/ > > > > Fixes: 291cd54e5b05 ("mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: test: Use kunit_test_suite() macro") > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> > > --- > > drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > > index 10c563999d3d..e63608834411 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > > @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED > > config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED_TEST > > bool "Tests for the ASPEED SDHCI driver" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS > > depends on MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED && KUNIT > > + depends on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y) > > Should this replace the line above? Isn't it just more constrained? > We need both lines. The first ensures that both KUNIT and MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED are available, and the second just targets the case where KUNIT=m and MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=y. If we got rid of the first line, we could end up compiling this without KUnit at all (if MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m). > Regardless, thanks for your work here, the kunit integration with the > ASPEED SDHCI driver bothered me a lot when I wrote it. No worries: we're all still figuring out exactly how these sorts of tests should interact with modules, so it's been a great real-world example for us to experiment with. Cheers, -- David
On Tue, 19 Jul 2022, at 11:11, David Gow wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 8:45 AM Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, 15 Jul 2022, at 13:33, David Gow wrote: >> > While the sdhci-of-aspeed KUnit tests do work when builtin, and do work >> > when KUnit itself is being built as a module, the two together break. >> > >> > This is because the KUnit tests (understandably) depend on KUnit, so a >> > built-in test cannot build if KUnit is a module. >> > >> > Fix this by adding a dependency on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y), >> > which only excludes this one problematic configuration. >> > >> > This was reported on a nasty openrisc-randconfig run by the kernel test >> > robot, though for some reason (compiler optimisations removing the test >> > code?) I wasn't able to reproduce it locally on x86: >> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202207140122.fzhlf60k-lkp@intel.com/T/ >> > >> > Fixes: 291cd54e5b05 ("mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: test: Use kunit_test_suite() macro") >> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> >> > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> >> > --- >> > drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig | 1 + >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig >> > index 10c563999d3d..e63608834411 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig >> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig >> > @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED >> > config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED_TEST >> > bool "Tests for the ASPEED SDHCI driver" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS >> > depends on MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED && KUNIT >> > + depends on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y) >> >> Should this replace the line above? Isn't it just more constrained? >> > > We need both lines. The first ensures that both KUNIT and > MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED are available, and the second just targets the > case where KUNIT=m and MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=y. > If we got rid of the first line, we could end up compiling this > without KUnit at all (if MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m). Ah, yes. Fair enough! Acked-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 at 06:04, David Gow <davidgow@google.com> wrote: > > While the sdhci-of-aspeed KUnit tests do work when builtin, and do work > when KUnit itself is being built as a module, the two together break. > > This is because the KUnit tests (understandably) depend on KUnit, so a > built-in test cannot build if KUnit is a module. > > Fix this by adding a dependency on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y), > which only excludes this one problematic configuration. > > This was reported on a nasty openrisc-randconfig run by the kernel test > robot, though for some reason (compiler optimisations removing the test > code?) I wasn't able to reproduce it locally on x86: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202207140122.fzhlf60k-lkp@intel.com/T/ > > Fixes: 291cd54e5b05 ("mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: test: Use kunit_test_suite() macro") > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> I assume this should go together with the other recent kunit patches, so please add: Acked-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> Kind regards Uffe > --- > drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > index 10c563999d3d..e63608834411 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED > config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED_TEST > bool "Tests for the ASPEED SDHCI driver" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS > depends on MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED && KUNIT > + depends on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y) > default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS > help > Enable KUnit tests for the ASPEED SDHCI driver. Select this > -- > 2.37.0.170.g444d1eabd0-goog >
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:04 AM David Gow <davidgow@google.com> wrote: > > While the sdhci-of-aspeed KUnit tests do work when builtin, and do work > when KUnit itself is being built as a module, the two together break. > > This is because the KUnit tests (understandably) depend on KUnit, so a > built-in test cannot build if KUnit is a module. > > Fix this by adding a dependency on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y), > which only excludes this one problematic configuration. > > This was reported on a nasty openrisc-randconfig run by the kernel test > robot, though for some reason (compiler optimisations removing the test > code?) I wasn't able to reproduce it locally on x86: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202207140122.fzhlf60k-lkp@intel.com/T/ > > Fixes: 291cd54e5b05 ("mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: test: Use kunit_test_suite() macro") > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Acked-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig index 10c563999d3d..e63608834411 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED config MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED_TEST bool "Tests for the ASPEED SDHCI driver" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS depends on MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED && KUNIT + depends on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y) default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS help Enable KUnit tests for the ASPEED SDHCI driver. Select this
While the sdhci-of-aspeed KUnit tests do work when builtin, and do work when KUnit itself is being built as a module, the two together break. This is because the KUnit tests (understandably) depend on KUnit, so a built-in test cannot build if KUnit is a module. Fix this by adding a dependency on (MMC_SDHCI_OF_ASPEED=m || KUNIT=y), which only excludes this one problematic configuration. This was reported on a nasty openrisc-randconfig run by the kernel test robot, though for some reason (compiler optimisations removing the test code?) I wasn't able to reproduce it locally on x86: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202207140122.fzhlf60k-lkp@intel.com/T/ Fixes: 291cd54e5b05 ("mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: test: Use kunit_test_suite() macro") Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> --- drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)