diff options
author | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2019-12-30 08:10:51 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2019-12-30 08:10:51 +0100 |
commit | 28336be568bb473d16ba80db0801276fb4f1bbe5 (patch) | |
tree | cf2d7a56e6c3ea08139d8d9a5a58b296bd172136 /Documentation/dev-tools | |
parent | kcsan: Improve various small stylistic details (diff) | |
parent | Linux 5.5-rc4 (diff) | |
download | linux-28336be568bb473d16ba80db0801276fb4f1bbe5.tar.xz linux-28336be568bb473d16ba80db0801276fb4f1bbe5.zip |
Merge tag 'v5.5-rc4' into locking/kcsan, to resolve conflicts
Conflicts:
init/main.c
lib/Kconfig.debug
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/dev-tools')
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/index.rst | 1 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kasan.rst | 63 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kcov.rst | 129 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kmemleak.rst | 2 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst | 8 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst | 16 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/test.rst | 11 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/faq.rst | 62 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/index.rst | 80 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/kunit-tool.rst | 57 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst | 180 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst | 576 |
12 files changed, 1180 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/index.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/index.rst index 1b756a7014e0..f7809c7b1ba9 100644 --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/index.rst @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ whole; patches welcome! gdb-kernel-debugging kgdb kselftest + kunit/index .. only:: subproject and html diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kasan.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kasan.rst index 525296121d89..e4d66e7c50de 100644 --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kasan.rst +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kasan.rst @@ -218,3 +218,66 @@ brk handler is used to print bug reports. A potential expansion of this mode is a hardware tag-based mode, which would use hardware memory tagging support instead of compiler instrumentation and manual shadow memory manipulation. + +What memory accesses are sanitised by KASAN? +-------------------------------------------- + +The kernel maps memory in a number of different parts of the address +space. This poses something of a problem for KASAN, which requires +that all addresses accessed by instrumented code have a valid shadow +region. + +The range of kernel virtual addresses is large: there is not enough +real memory to support a real shadow region for every address that +could be accessed by the kernel. + +By default +~~~~~~~~~~ + +By default, architectures only map real memory over the shadow region +for the linear mapping (and potentially other small areas). For all +other areas - such as vmalloc and vmemmap space - a single read-only +page is mapped over the shadow area. This read-only shadow page +declares all memory accesses as permitted. + +This presents a problem for modules: they do not live in the linear +mapping, but in a dedicated module space. By hooking in to the module +allocator, KASAN can temporarily map real shadow memory to cover +them. This allows detection of invalid accesses to module globals, for +example. + +This also creates an incompatibility with ``VMAP_STACK``: if the stack +lives in vmalloc space, it will be shadowed by the read-only page, and +the kernel will fault when trying to set up the shadow data for stack +variables. + +CONFIG_KASAN_VMALLOC +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +With ``CONFIG_KASAN_VMALLOC``, KASAN can cover vmalloc space at the +cost of greater memory usage. Currently this is only supported on x86. + +This works by hooking into vmalloc and vmap, and dynamically +allocating real shadow memory to back the mappings. + +Most mappings in vmalloc space are small, requiring less than a full +page of shadow space. Allocating a full shadow page per mapping would +therefore be wasteful. Furthermore, to ensure that different mappings +use different shadow pages, mappings would have to be aligned to +``KASAN_SHADOW_SCALE_SIZE * PAGE_SIZE``. + +Instead, we share backing space across multiple mappings. We allocate +a backing page when a mapping in vmalloc space uses a particular page +of the shadow region. This page can be shared by other vmalloc +mappings later on. + +We hook in to the vmap infrastructure to lazily clean up unused shadow +memory. + +To avoid the difficulties around swapping mappings around, we expect +that the part of the shadow region that covers the vmalloc space will +not be covered by the early shadow page, but will be left +unmapped. This will require changes in arch-specific code. + +This allows ``VMAP_STACK`` support on x86, and can simplify support of +architectures that do not have a fixed module region. diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kcov.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kcov.rst index 42b612677799..36890b026e77 100644 --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kcov.rst +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kcov.rst @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ Profiling data will only become accessible once debugfs has been mounted:: Coverage collection ------------------- + The following program demonstrates coverage collection from within a test program using kcov: @@ -128,6 +129,7 @@ only need to enable coverage (disable happens automatically on thread end). Comparison operands collection ------------------------------ + Comparison operands collection is similar to coverage collection: .. code-block:: c @@ -202,3 +204,130 @@ Comparison operands collection is similar to coverage collection: Note that the kcov modes (coverage collection or comparison operands) are mutually exclusive. + +Remote coverage collection +-------------------------- + +With KCOV_ENABLE coverage is collected only for syscalls that are issued +from the current process. With KCOV_REMOTE_ENABLE it's possible to collect +coverage for arbitrary parts of the kernel code, provided that those parts +are annotated with kcov_remote_start()/kcov_remote_stop(). + +This allows to collect coverage from two types of kernel background +threads: the global ones, that are spawned during kernel boot in a limited +number of instances (e.g. one USB hub_event() worker thread is spawned per +USB HCD); and the local ones, that are spawned when a user interacts with +some kernel interface (e.g. vhost workers). + +To enable collecting coverage from a global background thread, a unique +global handle must be assigned and passed to the corresponding +kcov_remote_start() call. Then a userspace process can pass a list of such +handles to the KCOV_REMOTE_ENABLE ioctl in the handles array field of the +kcov_remote_arg struct. This will attach the used kcov device to the code +sections, that are referenced by those handles. + +Since there might be many local background threads spawned from different +userspace processes, we can't use a single global handle per annotation. +Instead, the userspace process passes a non-zero handle through the +common_handle field of the kcov_remote_arg struct. This common handle gets +saved to the kcov_handle field in the current task_struct and needs to be +passed to the newly spawned threads via custom annotations. Those threads +should in turn be annotated with kcov_remote_start()/kcov_remote_stop(). + +Internally kcov stores handles as u64 integers. The top byte of a handle +is used to denote the id of a subsystem that this handle belongs to, and +the lower 4 bytes are used to denote the id of a thread instance within +that subsystem. A reserved value 0 is used as a subsystem id for common +handles as they don't belong to a particular subsystem. The bytes 4-7 are +currently reserved and must be zero. In the future the number of bytes +used for the subsystem or handle ids might be increased. + +When a particular userspace proccess collects coverage by via a common +handle, kcov will collect coverage for each code section that is annotated +to use the common handle obtained as kcov_handle from the current +task_struct. However non common handles allow to collect coverage +selectively from different subsystems. + +.. code-block:: c + + struct kcov_remote_arg { + unsigned trace_mode; + unsigned area_size; + unsigned num_handles; + uint64_t common_handle; + uint64_t handles[0]; + }; + + #define KCOV_INIT_TRACE _IOR('c', 1, unsigned long) + #define KCOV_DISABLE _IO('c', 101) + #define KCOV_REMOTE_ENABLE _IOW('c', 102, struct kcov_remote_arg) + + #define COVER_SIZE (64 << 10) + + #define KCOV_TRACE_PC 0 + + #define KCOV_SUBSYSTEM_COMMON (0x00ull << 56) + #define KCOV_SUBSYSTEM_USB (0x01ull << 56) + + #define KCOV_SUBSYSTEM_MASK (0xffull << 56) + #define KCOV_INSTANCE_MASK (0xffffffffull) + + static inline __u64 kcov_remote_handle(__u64 subsys, __u64 inst) + { + if (subsys & ~KCOV_SUBSYSTEM_MASK || inst & ~KCOV_INSTANCE_MASK) + return 0; + return subsys | inst; + } + + #define KCOV_COMMON_ID 0x42 + #define KCOV_USB_BUS_NUM 1 + + int main(int argc, char **argv) + { + int fd; + unsigned long *cover, n, i; + struct kcov_remote_arg *arg; + + fd = open("/sys/kernel/debug/kcov", O_RDWR); + if (fd == -1) + perror("open"), exit(1); + if (ioctl(fd, KCOV_INIT_TRACE, COVER_SIZE)) + perror("ioctl"), exit(1); + cover = (unsigned long*)mmap(NULL, COVER_SIZE * sizeof(unsigned long), + PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0); + if ((void*)cover == MAP_FAILED) + perror("mmap"), exit(1); + + /* Enable coverage collection via common handle and from USB bus #1. */ + arg = calloc(1, sizeof(*arg) + sizeof(uint64_t)); + if (!arg) + perror("calloc"), exit(1); + arg->trace_mode = KCOV_TRACE_PC; + arg->area_size = COVER_SIZE; + arg->num_handles = 1; + arg->common_handle = kcov_remote_handle(KCOV_SUBSYSTEM_COMMON, + KCOV_COMMON_ID); + arg->handles[0] = kcov_remote_handle(KCOV_SUBSYSTEM_USB, + KCOV_USB_BUS_NUM); + if (ioctl(fd, KCOV_REMOTE_ENABLE, arg)) + perror("ioctl"), free(arg), exit(1); + free(arg); + + /* + * Here the user needs to trigger execution of a kernel code section + * that is either annotated with the common handle, or to trigger some + * activity on USB bus #1. + */ + sleep(2); + + n = __atomic_load_n(&cover[0], __ATOMIC_RELAXED); + for (i = 0; i < n; i++) + printf("0x%lx\n", cover[i + 1]); + if (ioctl(fd, KCOV_DISABLE, 0)) + perror("ioctl"), exit(1); + if (munmap(cover, COVER_SIZE * sizeof(unsigned long))) + perror("munmap"), exit(1); + if (close(fd)) + perror("close"), exit(1); + return 0; + } diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kmemleak.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kmemleak.rst index 3621cd5e1eef..3a289e8a1d12 100644 --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kmemleak.rst +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kmemleak.rst @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ the kernel command line. Memory may be allocated or freed before kmemleak is initialised and these actions are stored in an early log buffer. The size of this buffer -is configured via the CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK_EARLY_LOG_SIZE option. +is configured via the CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK_MEM_POOL_SIZE option. If CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK_DEFAULT_OFF are enabled, the kmemleak is disabled by default. Passing ``kmemleak=on`` on the kernel command diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst index ecdfdc9d4b03..61ae13c44f91 100644 --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst @@ -203,12 +203,12 @@ Test Module Kselftest tests the kernel from userspace. Sometimes things need testing from within the kernel, one method of doing this is to create a test module. We can tie the module into the kselftest framework by -using a shell script test runner. ``kselftest_module.sh`` is designed +using a shell script test runner. ``kselftest/module.sh`` is designed to facilitate this process. There is also a header file provided to assist writing kernel modules that are for use with kselftest: - ``tools/testing/kselftest/kselftest_module.h`` -- ``tools/testing/kselftest/kselftest_module.sh`` +- ``tools/testing/kselftest/kselftest/module.sh`` How to use ---------- @@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ A bare bones test module might look like this: #define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt - #include "../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest_module.h" + #include "../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest/module.h" KSTM_MODULE_GLOBALS(); @@ -276,7 +276,7 @@ Example test script #!/bin/bash # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ - $(dirname $0)/../kselftest_module.sh "foo" test_foo + $(dirname $0)/../kselftest/module.sh "foo" test_foo Test Harness diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..9b9bffe5d41a --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +============= +API Reference +============= +.. toctree:: + + test + +This section documents the KUnit kernel testing API. It is divided into the +following sections: + +================================= ============================================== +:doc:`test` documents all of the standard testing API + excluding mocking or mocking related features. +================================= ============================================== diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/test.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/test.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..aaa97f17e5b3 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/test.rst @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +======== +Test API +======== + +This file documents all of the standard testing API excluding mocking or mocking +related features. + +.. kernel-doc:: include/kunit/test.h + :internal: diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/faq.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/faq.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..bf2095112d89 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/faq.rst @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +========================== +Frequently Asked Questions +========================== + +How is this different from Autotest, kselftest, etc? +==================================================== +KUnit is a unit testing framework. Autotest, kselftest (and some others) are +not. + +A `unit test <https://martinfowler.com/bliki/UnitTest.html>`_ is supposed to +test a single unit of code in isolation, hence the name. A unit test should be +the finest granularity of testing and as such should allow all possible code +paths to be tested in the code under test; this is only possible if the code +under test is very small and does not have any external dependencies outside of +the test's control like hardware. + +There are no testing frameworks currently available for the kernel that do not +require installing the kernel on a test machine or in a VM and all require +tests to be written in userspace and run on the kernel under test; this is true +for Autotest, kselftest, and some others, disqualifying any of them from being +considered unit testing frameworks. + +Does KUnit support running on architectures other than UML? +=========================================================== + +Yes, well, mostly. + +For the most part, the KUnit core framework (what you use to write the tests) +can compile to any architecture; it compiles like just another part of the +kernel and runs when the kernel boots. However, there is some infrastructure, +like the KUnit Wrapper (``tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py``) that does not support +other architectures. + +In short, this means that, yes, you can run KUnit on other architectures, but +it might require more work than using KUnit on UML. + +For more information, see :ref:`kunit-on-non-uml`. + +What is the difference between a unit test and these other kinds of tests? +========================================================================== +Most existing tests for the Linux kernel would be categorized as an integration +test, or an end-to-end test. + +- A unit test is supposed to test a single unit of code in isolation, hence the + name. A unit test should be the finest granularity of testing and as such + should allow all possible code paths to be tested in the code under test; this + is only possible if the code under test is very small and does not have any + external dependencies outside of the test's control like hardware. +- An integration test tests the interaction between a minimal set of components, + usually just two or three. For example, someone might write an integration + test to test the interaction between a driver and a piece of hardware, or to + test the interaction between the userspace libraries the kernel provides and + the kernel itself; however, one of these tests would probably not test the + entire kernel along with hardware interactions and interactions with the + userspace. +- An end-to-end test usually tests the entire system from the perspective of the + code under test. For example, someone might write an end-to-end test for the + kernel by installing a production configuration of the kernel on production + hardware with a production userspace and then trying to exercise some behavior + that depends on interactions between the hardware, the kernel, and userspace. diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/index.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..c60d760a0eed --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +========================================= +KUnit - Unit Testing for the Linux Kernel +========================================= + +.. toctree:: + :maxdepth: 2 + + start + usage + kunit-tool + api/index + faq + +What is KUnit? +============== + +KUnit is a lightweight unit testing and mocking framework for the Linux kernel. +These tests are able to be run locally on a developer's workstation without a VM +or special hardware. + +KUnit is heavily inspired by JUnit, Python's unittest.mock, and +Googletest/Googlemock for C++. KUnit provides facilities for defining unit test +cases, grouping related test cases into test suites, providing common +infrastructure for running tests, and much more. + +Get started now: :doc:`start` + +Why KUnit? +========== + +A unit test is supposed to test a single unit of code in isolation, hence the +name. A unit test should be the finest granularity of testing and as such should +allow all possible code paths to be tested in the code under test; this is only +possible if the code under test is very small and does not have any external +dependencies outside of the test's control like hardware. + +Outside of KUnit, there are no testing frameworks currently +available for the kernel that do not require installing the kernel on a test +machine or in a VM and all require tests to be written in userspace running on +the kernel; this is true for Autotest, and kselftest, disqualifying +any of them from being considered unit testing frameworks. + +KUnit addresses the problem of being able to run tests without needing a virtual +machine or actual hardware with User Mode Linux. User Mode Linux is a Linux +architecture, like ARM or x86; however, unlike other architectures it compiles +to a standalone program that can be run like any other program directly inside +of a host operating system; to be clear, it does not require any virtualization +support; it is just a regular program. + +KUnit is fast. Excluding build time, from invocation to completion KUnit can run +several dozen tests in only 10 to 20 seconds; this might not sound like a big +deal to some people, but having such fast and easy to run tests fundamentally +changes the way you go about testing and even writing code in the first place. +Linus himself said in his `git talk at Google +<https://gist.github.com/lorn/1272686/revisions#diff-53c65572127855f1b003db4064a94573R874>`_: + + "... a lot of people seem to think that performance is about doing the + same thing, just doing it faster, and that is not true. That is not what + performance is all about. If you can do something really fast, really + well, people will start using it differently." + +In this context Linus was talking about branching and merging, +but this point also applies to testing. If your tests are slow, unreliable, are +difficult to write, and require a special setup or special hardware to run, +then you wait a lot longer to write tests, and you wait a lot longer to run +tests; this means that tests are likely to break, unlikely to test a lot of +things, and are unlikely to be rerun once they pass. If your tests are really +fast, you run them all the time, every time you make a change, and every time +someone sends you some code. Why trust that someone ran all their tests +correctly on every change when you can just run them yourself in less time than +it takes to read their test log? + +How do I use it? +================ + +* :doc:`start` - for new users of KUnit +* :doc:`usage` - for a more detailed explanation of KUnit features +* :doc:`api/index` - for the list of KUnit APIs used for testing diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/kunit-tool.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/kunit-tool.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..50d46394e97e --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/kunit-tool.rst @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +================= +kunit_tool How-To +================= + +What is kunit_tool? +=================== + +kunit_tool is a script (``tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py``) that aids in building +the Linux kernel as UML (`User Mode Linux +<http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/>`_), running KUnit tests, parsing +the test results and displaying them in a user friendly manner. + +What is a kunitconfig? +====================== + +It's just a defconfig that kunit_tool looks for in the base directory. +kunit_tool uses it to generate a .config as you might expect. In addition, it +verifies that the generated .config contains the CONFIG options in the +kunitconfig; the reason it does this is so that it is easy to be sure that a +CONFIG that enables a test actually ends up in the .config. + +How do I use kunit_tool? +======================== + +If a kunitconfig is present at the root directory, all you have to do is: + +.. code-block:: bash + + ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run + +However, you most likely want to use it with the following options: + +.. code-block:: bash + + ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --timeout=30 --jobs=`nproc --all` + +- ``--timeout`` sets a maximum amount of time to allow tests to run. +- ``--jobs`` sets the number of threads to use to build the kernel. + +If you just want to use the defconfig that ships with the kernel, you can +append the ``--defconfig`` flag as well: + +.. code-block:: bash + + ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --timeout=30 --jobs=`nproc --all` --defconfig + +.. note:: + This command is particularly helpful for getting started because it + just works. No kunitconfig needs to be present. + +For a list of all the flags supported by kunit_tool, you can run: + +.. code-block:: bash + + ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --help diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..4e1d24db6b13 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst @@ -0,0 +1,180 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +=============== +Getting Started +=============== + +Installing dependencies +======================= +KUnit has the same dependencies as the Linux kernel. As long as you can build +the kernel, you can run KUnit. + +KUnit Wrapper +============= +Included with KUnit is a simple Python wrapper that helps format the output to +easily use and read KUnit output. It handles building and running the kernel, as +well as formatting the output. + +The wrapper can be run with: + +.. code-block:: bash + + ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --defconfig + +For more information on this wrapper (also called kunit_tool) checkout the +:doc:`kunit-tool` page. + +Creating a .kunitconfig +======================= +The Python script is a thin wrapper around Kbuild. As such, it needs to be +configured with a ``.kunitconfig`` file. This file essentially contains the +regular Kernel config, with the specific test targets as well. + +.. code-block:: bash + + cd $PATH_TO_LINUX_REPO + cp arch/um/configs/kunit_defconfig .kunitconfig + +Verifying KUnit Works +--------------------- + +To make sure that everything is set up correctly, simply invoke the Python +wrapper from your kernel repo: + +.. code-block:: bash + + ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run + +.. note:: + You may want to run ``make mrproper`` first. + +If everything worked correctly, you should see the following: + +.. code-block:: bash + + Generating .config ... + Building KUnit Kernel ... + Starting KUnit Kernel ... + +followed by a list of tests that are run. All of them should be passing. + +.. note:: + Because it is building a lot of sources for the first time, the + ``Building KUnit kernel`` step may take a while. + +Writing your first test +======================= + +In your kernel repo let's add some code that we can test. Create a file +``drivers/misc/example.h`` with the contents: + +.. code-block:: c + + int misc_example_add(int left, int right); + +create a file ``drivers/misc/example.c``: + +.. code-block:: c + + #include <linux/errno.h> + + #include "example.h" + + int misc_example_add(int left, int right) + { + return left + right; + } + +Now add the following lines to ``drivers/misc/Kconfig``: + +.. code-block:: kconfig + + config MISC_EXAMPLE + bool "My example" + +and the following lines to ``drivers/misc/Makefile``: + +.. code-block:: make + + obj-$(CONFIG_MISC_EXAMPLE) += example.o + +Now we are ready to write the test. The test will be in +``drivers/misc/example-test.c``: + +.. code-block:: c + + #include <kunit/test.h> + #include "example.h" + + /* Define the test cases. */ + + static void misc_example_add_test_basic(struct kunit *test) + { + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1, misc_example_add(1, 0)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2, misc_example_add(1, 1)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, misc_example_add(-1, 1)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, INT_MAX, misc_example_add(0, INT_MAX)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, -1, misc_example_add(INT_MAX, INT_MIN)); + } + + static void misc_example_test_failure(struct kunit *test) + { + KUNIT_FAIL(test, "This test never passes."); + } + + static struct kunit_case misc_example_test_cases[] = { + KUNIT_CASE(misc_example_add_test_basic), + KUNIT_CASE(misc_example_test_failure), + {} + }; + + static struct kunit_suite misc_example_test_suite = { + .name = "misc-example", + .test_cases = misc_example_test_cases, + }; + kunit_test_suite(misc_example_test_suite); + +Now add the following to ``drivers/misc/Kconfig``: + +.. code-block:: kconfig + + config MISC_EXAMPLE_TEST + bool "Test for my example" + depends on MISC_EXAMPLE && KUNIT + +and the following to ``drivers/misc/Makefile``: + +.. code-block:: make + + obj-$(CONFIG_MISC_EXAMPLE_TEST) += example-test.o + +Now add it to your ``.kunitconfig``: + +.. code-block:: none + + CONFIG_MISC_EXAMPLE=y + CONFIG_MISC_EXAMPLE_TEST=y + +Now you can run the test: + +.. code-block:: bash + + ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run + +You should see the following failure: + +.. code-block:: none + + ... + [16:08:57] [PASSED] misc-example:misc_example_add_test_basic + [16:08:57] [FAILED] misc-example:misc_example_test_failure + [16:08:57] EXPECTATION FAILED at drivers/misc/example-test.c:17 + [16:08:57] This test never passes. + ... + +Congrats! You just wrote your first KUnit test! + +Next Steps +========== +* Check out the :doc:`usage` page for a more + in-depth explanation of KUnit. diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..b9a065ab681e --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst @@ -0,0 +1,576 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +=========== +Using KUnit +=========== + +The purpose of this document is to describe what KUnit is, how it works, how it +is intended to be used, and all the concepts and terminology that are needed to +understand it. This guide assumes a working knowledge of the Linux kernel and +some basic knowledge of testing. + +For a high level introduction to KUnit, including setting up KUnit for your +project, see :doc:`start`. + +Organization of this document +============================= + +This document is organized into two main sections: Testing and Isolating +Behavior. The first covers what unit tests are and how to use KUnit to write +them. The second covers how to use KUnit to isolate code and make it possible +to unit test code that was otherwise un-unit-testable. + +Testing +======= + +What is KUnit? +-------------- + +"K" is short for "kernel" so "KUnit" is the "(Linux) Kernel Unit Testing +Framework." KUnit is intended first and foremost for writing unit tests; it is +general enough that it can be used to write integration tests; however, this is +a secondary goal. KUnit has no ambition of being the only testing framework for +the kernel; for example, it does not intend to be an end-to-end testing +framework. + +What is Unit Testing? +--------------------- + +A `unit test <https://martinfowler.com/bliki/UnitTest.html>`_ is a test that +tests code at the smallest possible scope, a *unit* of code. In the C +programming language that's a function. + +Unit tests should be written for all the publicly exposed functions in a +compilation unit; so that is all the functions that are exported in either a +*class* (defined below) or all functions which are **not** static. + +Writing Tests +------------- + +Test Cases +~~~~~~~~~~ + +The fundamental unit in KUnit is the test case. A test case is a function with +the signature ``void (*)(struct kunit *test)``. It calls a function to be tested +and then sets *expectations* for what should happen. For example: + +.. code-block:: c + + void example_test_success(struct kunit *test) + { + } + + void example_test_failure(struct kunit *test) + { + KUNIT_FAIL(test, "This test never passes."); + } + +In the above example ``example_test_success`` always passes because it does +nothing; no expectations are set, so all expectations pass. On the other hand +``example_test_failure`` always fails because it calls ``KUNIT_FAIL``, which is +a special expectation that logs a message and causes the test case to fail. + +Expectations +~~~~~~~~~~~~ +An *expectation* is a way to specify that you expect a piece of code to do +something in a test. An expectation is called like a function. A test is made +by setting expectations about the behavior of a piece of code under test; when +one or more of the expectations fail, the test case fails and information about +the failure is logged. For example: + +.. code-block:: c + + void add_test_basic(struct kunit *test) + { + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1, add(1, 0)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2, add(1, 1)); + } + +In the above example ``add_test_basic`` makes a number of assertions about the +behavior of a function called ``add``; the first parameter is always of type +``struct kunit *``, which contains information about the current test context; +the second parameter, in this case, is what the value is expected to be; the +last value is what the value actually is. If ``add`` passes all of these +expectations, the test case, ``add_test_basic`` will pass; if any one of these +expectations fail, the test case will fail. + +It is important to understand that a test case *fails* when any expectation is +violated; however, the test will continue running, potentially trying other +expectations until the test case ends or is otherwise terminated. This is as +opposed to *assertions* which are discussed later. + +To learn about more expectations supported by KUnit, see :doc:`api/test`. + +.. note:: + A single test case should be pretty short, pretty easy to understand, + focused on a single behavior. + +For example, if we wanted to properly test the add function above, we would +create additional tests cases which would each test a different property that an +add function should have like this: + +.. code-block:: c + + void add_test_basic(struct kunit *test) + { + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1, add(1, 0)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2, add(1, 1)); + } + + void add_test_negative(struct kunit *test) + { + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, add(-1, 1)); + } + + void add_test_max(struct kunit *test) + { + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, INT_MAX, add(0, INT_MAX)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, -1, add(INT_MAX, INT_MIN)); + } + + void add_test_overflow(struct kunit *test) + { + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, INT_MIN, add(INT_MAX, 1)); + } + +Notice how it is immediately obvious what all the properties that we are testing +for are. + +Assertions +~~~~~~~~~~ + +KUnit also has the concept of an *assertion*. An assertion is just like an +expectation except the assertion immediately terminates the test case if it is +not satisfied. + +For example: + +.. code-block:: c + + static void mock_test_do_expect_default_return(struct kunit *test) + { + struct mock_test_context *ctx = test->priv; + struct mock *mock = ctx->mock; + int param0 = 5, param1 = -5; + const char *two_param_types[] = {"int", "int"}; + const void *two_params[] = {¶m0, ¶m1}; + const void *ret; + + ret = mock->do_expect(mock, + "test_printk", test_printk, + two_param_types, two_params, + ARRAY_SIZE(two_params)); + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, ret); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, -4, *((int *) ret)); + } + +In this example, the method under test should return a pointer to a value, so +if the pointer returned by the method is null or an errno, we don't want to +bother continuing the test since the following expectation could crash the test +case. `ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(...)` allows us to bail out of the test case if +the appropriate conditions have not been satisfied to complete the test. + +Test Suites +~~~~~~~~~~~ + +Now obviously one unit test isn't very helpful; the power comes from having +many test cases covering all of a unit's behaviors. Consequently it is common +to have many *similar* tests; in order to reduce duplication in these closely +related tests most unit testing frameworks - including KUnit - provide the +concept of a *test suite*. A *test suite* is just a collection of test cases +for a unit of code with a set up function that gets invoked before every test +case and then a tear down function that gets invoked after every test case +completes. + +Example: + +.. code-block:: c + + static struct kunit_case example_test_cases[] = { + KUNIT_CASE(example_test_foo), + KUNIT_CASE(example_test_bar), + KUNIT_CASE(example_test_baz), + {} + }; + + static struct kunit_suite example_test_suite = { + .name = "example", + .init = example_test_init, + .exit = example_test_exit, + .test_cases = example_test_cases, + }; + kunit_test_suite(example_test_suite); + +In the above example the test suite, ``example_test_suite``, would run the test +cases ``example_test_foo``, ``example_test_bar``, and ``example_test_baz``, +each would have ``example_test_init`` called immediately before it and would +have ``example_test_exit`` called immediately after it. +``kunit_test_suite(example_test_suite)`` registers the test suite with the +KUnit test framework. + +.. note:: + A test case will only be run if it is associated with a test suite. + +For more information on these types of things see the :doc:`api/test`. + +Isolating Behavior +================== + +The most important aspect of unit testing that other forms of testing do not +provide is the ability to limit the amount of code under test to a single unit. +In practice, this is only possible by being able to control what code gets run +when the unit under test calls a function and this is usually accomplished +through some sort of indirection where a function is exposed as part of an API +such that the definition of that function can be changed without affecting the +rest of the code base. In the kernel this primarily comes from two constructs, +classes, structs that contain function pointers that are provided by the +implementer, and architecture specific functions which have definitions selected +at compile time. + +Classes +------- + +Classes are not a construct that is built into the C programming language; +however, it is an easily derived concept. Accordingly, pretty much every project +that does not use a standardized object oriented library (like GNOME's GObject) +has their own slightly different way of doing object oriented programming; the +Linux kernel is no exception. + +The central concept in kernel object oriented programming is the class. In the +kernel, a *class* is a struct that contains function pointers. This creates a +contract between *implementers* and *users* since it forces them to use the +same function signature without having to call the function directly. In order +for it to truly be a class, the function pointers must specify that a pointer +to the class, known as a *class handle*, be one of the parameters; this makes +it possible for the member functions (also known as *methods*) to have access +to member variables (more commonly known as *fields*) allowing the same +implementation to have multiple *instances*. + +Typically a class can be *overridden* by *child classes* by embedding the +*parent class* in the child class. Then when a method provided by the child +class is called, the child implementation knows that the pointer passed to it is +of a parent contained within the child; because of this, the child can compute +the pointer to itself because the pointer to the parent is always a fixed offset +from the pointer to the child; this offset is the offset of the parent contained +in the child struct. For example: + +.. code-block:: c + + struct shape { + int (*area)(struct shape *this); + }; + + struct rectangle { + struct shape parent; + int length; + int width; + }; + + int rectangle_area(struct shape *this) + { + struct rectangle *self = container_of(this, struct shape, parent); + + return self->length * self->width; + }; + + void rectangle_new(struct rectangle *self, int length, int width) + { + self->parent.area = rectangle_area; + self->length = length; + self->width = width; + } + +In this example (as in most kernel code) the operation of computing the pointer +to the child from the pointer to the parent is done by ``container_of``. + +Faking Classes +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +In order to unit test a piece of code that calls a method in a class, the +behavior of the method must be controllable, otherwise the test ceases to be a +unit test and becomes an integration test. + +A fake just provides an implementation of a piece of code that is different than +what runs in a production instance, but behaves identically from the standpoint +of the callers; this is usually done to replace a dependency that is hard to +deal with, or is slow. + +A good example for this might be implementing a fake EEPROM that just stores the +"contents" in an internal buffer. For example, let's assume we have a class that +represents an EEPROM: + +.. code-block:: c + + struct eeprom { + ssize_t (*read)(struct eeprom *this, size_t offset, char *buffer, size_t count); + ssize_t (*write)(struct eeprom *this, size_t offset, const char *buffer, size_t count); + }; + +And we want to test some code that buffers writes to the EEPROM: + +.. code-block:: c + + struct eeprom_buffer { + ssize_t (*write)(struct eeprom_buffer *this, const char *buffer, size_t count); + int flush(struct eeprom_buffer *this); + size_t flush_count; /* Flushes when buffer exceeds flush_count. */ + }; + + struct eeprom_buffer *new_eeprom_buffer(struct eeprom *eeprom); + void destroy_eeprom_buffer(struct eeprom *eeprom); + +We can easily test this code by *faking out* the underlying EEPROM: + +.. code-block:: c + + struct fake_eeprom { + struct eeprom parent; + char contents[FAKE_EEPROM_CONTENTS_SIZE]; + }; + + ssize_t fake_eeprom_read(struct eeprom *parent, size_t offset, char *buffer, size_t count) + { + struct fake_eeprom *this = container_of(parent, struct fake_eeprom, parent); + + count = min(count, FAKE_EEPROM_CONTENTS_SIZE - offset); + memcpy(buffer, this->contents + offset, count); + + return count; + } + + ssize_t fake_eeprom_write(struct eeprom *parent, size_t offset, const char *buffer, size_t count) + { + struct fake_eeprom *this = container_of(parent, struct fake_eeprom, parent); + + count = min(count, FAKE_EEPROM_CONTENTS_SIZE - offset); + memcpy(this->contents + offset, buffer, count); + + return count; + } + + void fake_eeprom_init(struct fake_eeprom *this) + { + this->parent.read = fake_eeprom_read; + this->parent.write = fake_eeprom_write; + memset(this->contents, 0, FAKE_EEPROM_CONTENTS_SIZE); + } + +We can now use it to test ``struct eeprom_buffer``: + +.. code-block:: c + + struct eeprom_buffer_test { + struct fake_eeprom *fake_eeprom; + struct eeprom_buffer *eeprom_buffer; + }; + + static void eeprom_buffer_test_does_not_write_until_flush(struct kunit *test) + { + struct eeprom_buffer_test *ctx = test->priv; + struct eeprom_buffer *eeprom_buffer = ctx->eeprom_buffer; + struct fake_eeprom *fake_eeprom = ctx->fake_eeprom; + char buffer[] = {0xff}; + + eeprom_buffer->flush_count = SIZE_MAX; + + eeprom_buffer->write(eeprom_buffer, buffer, 1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[0], 0); + + eeprom_buffer->write(eeprom_buffer, buffer, 1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[1], 0); + + eeprom_buffer->flush(eeprom_buffer); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[0], 0xff); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[1], 0xff); + } + + static void eeprom_buffer_test_flushes_after_flush_count_met(struct kunit *test) + { + struct eeprom_buffer_test *ctx = test->priv; + struct eeprom_buffer *eeprom_buffer = ctx->eeprom_buffer; + struct fake_eeprom *fake_eeprom = ctx->fake_eeprom; + char buffer[] = {0xff}; + + eeprom_buffer->flush_count = 2; + + eeprom_buffer->write(eeprom_buffer, buffer, 1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[0], 0); + + eeprom_buffer->write(eeprom_buffer, buffer, 1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[0], 0xff); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[1], 0xff); + } + + static void eeprom_buffer_test_flushes_increments_of_flush_count(struct kunit *test) + { + struct eeprom_buffer_test *ctx = test->priv; + struct eeprom_buffer *eeprom_buffer = ctx->eeprom_buffer; + struct fake_eeprom *fake_eeprom = ctx->fake_eeprom; + char buffer[] = {0xff, 0xff}; + + eeprom_buffer->flush_count = 2; + + eeprom_buffer->write(eeprom_buffer, buffer, 1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[0], 0); + + eeprom_buffer->write(eeprom_buffer, buffer, 2); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[0], 0xff); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[1], 0xff); + /* Should have only flushed the first two bytes. */ + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake_eeprom->contents[2], 0); + } + + static int eeprom_buffer_test_init(struct kunit *test) + { + struct eeprom_buffer_test *ctx; + + ctx = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL); + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, ctx); + + ctx->fake_eeprom = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*ctx->fake_eeprom), GFP_KERNEL); + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, ctx->fake_eeprom); + fake_eeprom_init(ctx->fake_eeprom); + + ctx->eeprom_buffer = new_eeprom_buffer(&ctx->fake_eeprom->parent); + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, ctx->eeprom_buffer); + + test->priv = ctx; + + return 0; + } + + static void eeprom_buffer_test_exit(struct kunit *test) + { + struct eeprom_buffer_test *ctx = test->priv; + + destroy_eeprom_buffer(ctx->eeprom_buffer); + } + +.. _kunit-on-non-uml: + +KUnit on non-UML architectures +============================== + +By default KUnit uses UML as a way to provide dependencies for code under test. +Under most circumstances KUnit's usage of UML should be treated as an +implementation detail of how KUnit works under the hood. Nevertheless, there +are instances where being able to run architecture specific code or test +against real hardware is desirable. For these reasons KUnit supports running on +other architectures. + +Running existing KUnit tests on non-UML architectures +----------------------------------------------------- + +There are some special considerations when running existing KUnit tests on +non-UML architectures: + +* Hardware may not be deterministic, so a test that always passes or fails + when run under UML may not always do so on real hardware. +* Hardware and VM environments may not be hermetic. KUnit tries its best to + provide a hermetic environment to run tests; however, it cannot manage state + that it doesn't know about outside of the kernel. Consequently, tests that + may be hermetic on UML may not be hermetic on other architectures. +* Some features and tooling may not be supported outside of UML. +* Hardware and VMs are slower than UML. + +None of these are reasons not to run your KUnit tests on real hardware; they are +only things to be aware of when doing so. + +The biggest impediment will likely be that certain KUnit features and +infrastructure may not support your target environment. For example, at this +time the KUnit Wrapper (``tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py``) does not work outside +of UML. Unfortunately, there is no way around this. Using UML (or even just a +particular architecture) allows us to make a lot of assumptions that make it +possible to do things which might otherwise be impossible. + +Nevertheless, all core KUnit framework features are fully supported on all +architectures, and using them is straightforward: all you need to do is to take +your kunitconfig, your Kconfig options for the tests you would like to run, and +merge them into whatever config your are using for your platform. That's it! + +For example, let's say you have the following kunitconfig: + +.. code-block:: none + + CONFIG_KUNIT=y + CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=y + +If you wanted to run this test on an x86 VM, you might add the following config +options to your ``.config``: + +.. code-block:: none + + CONFIG_KUNIT=y + CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=y + CONFIG_SERIAL_8250=y + CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_CONSOLE=y + +All these new options do is enable support for a common serial console needed +for logging. + +Next, you could build a kernel with these tests as follows: + + +.. code-block:: bash + + make ARCH=x86 olddefconfig + make ARCH=x86 + +Once you have built a kernel, you could run it on QEMU as follows: + +.. code-block:: bash + + qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm \ + -m 1024 \ + -kernel arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage \ + -append 'console=ttyS0' \ + --nographic + +Interspersed in the kernel logs you might see the following: + +.. code-block:: none + + TAP version 14 + # Subtest: example + 1..1 + # example_simple_test: initializing + ok 1 - example_simple_test + ok 1 - example + +Congratulations, you just ran a KUnit test on the x86 architecture! + +Writing new tests for other architectures +----------------------------------------- + +The first thing you must do is ask yourself whether it is necessary to write a +KUnit test for a specific architecture, and then whether it is necessary to +write that test for a particular piece of hardware. In general, writing a test +that depends on having access to a particular piece of hardware or software (not +included in the Linux source repo) should be avoided at all costs. + +Even if you only ever plan on running your KUnit test on your hardware +configuration, other people may want to run your tests and may not have access +to your hardware. If you write your test to run on UML, then anyone can run your +tests without knowing anything about your particular setup, and you can still +run your tests on your hardware setup just by compiling for your architecture. + +.. important:: + Always prefer tests that run on UML to tests that only run under a particular + architecture, and always prefer tests that run under QEMU or another easy + (and monetarily free) to obtain software environment to a specific piece of + hardware. + +Nevertheless, there are still valid reasons to write an architecture or hardware +specific test: for example, you might want to test some code that really belongs +in ``arch/some-arch/*``. Even so, try your best to write the test so that it +does not depend on physical hardware: if some of your test cases don't need the +hardware, only require the hardware for tests that actually need it. + +Now that you have narrowed down exactly what bits are hardware specific, the +actual procedure for writing and running the tests is pretty much the same as +writing normal KUnit tests. One special caveat is that you have to reset +hardware state in between test cases; if this is not possible, you may only be +able to run one test case per invocation. + +.. TODO(brendanhiggins@google.com): Add an actual example of an architecture + dependent KUnit test. |