8:57 p.m.
On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 10:52:50AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:53 AM Brendan Higgins
<brendanhiggins(a)google.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 4:22 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof(a)kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:02AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > diff --git a/kunit/example-test.c b/kunit/example-test.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000000000..f44b8ece488bb
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/kunit/example-test.c
> >
> > <-- snip -->
> >
> > > +/*
> > > + * This defines a suite or grouping of tests.
> > > + *
> > > + * Test cases are defined as belonging to the suite by adding them to
> > > + * `kunit_cases`.
> > > + *
> > > + * Often it is desirable to run some function which will set up things
which
> > > + * will be used by every test; this is accomplished with an `init`
function
> > > + * which runs before each test case is invoked. Similarly, an `exit`
function
> > > + * may be specified which runs after every test case and can be used to
for
> > > + * cleanup. For clarity, running tests in a test module would behave as
follows:
> > > + *
> >
> > To be clear this is not the kernel module init, but rather the kunit
> > module init. I think using kmodule would make this clearer to a reader.
>
> Seems reasonable. Will fix in next revision.
>
> > > + * module.init(test);
> > > + * module.test_case[0](test);
> > > + * module.exit(test);
> > > + * module.init(test);
> > > + * module.test_case[1](test);
> > > + * module.exit(test);
> > > + * ...;
> > > + */
Do you think it might be clearer yet to rename `struct kunit_module
*module;` to `struct kunit_suite *suite;`?
Yes. Definitely. Or struct kunit_test. Up to you.
Luis