If no KTAP header is found in the kernel output (e.g., because the kernel
crashed before the KUnit executor was run), it's very useful to re-run the
test with --raw_output=all, as that will show any error output (such as a
stacktrace, log message, BUG, etc). This is not particularly intuitive,
however, as --raw_output=all is not well known.
Add an extra log line to advertise --raw_output=all in this case, as it's
a terrible user experience to just get "Did any KUnit tests run?"
Signed-off-by: David Gow <david@davidgow.net>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
A bug was identified where the KTAP below caused an infinite loop:
TAP version 13
ok 4 test_case
1..4
The infinite loop was caused by the parser not parsing a test plan
if following a test result line.
Fix this bug by parsing test plan line to avoid the infinite loop.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250313192714.1380005-1-rmoar@google.com
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Add flag --failed to kunit.py to print only failed tests. This printing
is done after running is over.
This patch also adds the method print_test() that will also print your
Test object. Before, all printing of tests occurred during parsing. This
method could be useful in the future when converting to/from KTAP to this
pretty-print output.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241113222406.1590372-2-rmoar@google.com
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Add parsing of attributes as diagnostic data. Fixes issue with test plan
being parsed incorrectly as diagnostic data when located after
suite-level attributes.
Note that if there does not exist a test plan line, the diagnostic lines
between the suite header and the first result will be saved in the suite
log rather than the first test case log.
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Add ability to kunit.py to filter attributes and report a list of tests
including attributes without running tests.
Add flag "--filter" to input filters on test attributes. Tests will be
filtered out if they do not match all inputted filters.
Example: --filter speed=slow (This filter would run only the tests that are
marked as slow)
Filters have operations: <, >, <=, >=, !=, and =. But note that the
characters < and > are often interpreted by the shell, so they may need to
be quoted or escaped.
Example: --filter "speed>slow" or --filter speed\>slow (This filter would
run only the tests that have the speed faster than slow.
Additionally, multiple filters can be used.
Example: --filter "speed=slow, module!=example" (This filter would run
only the tests that have the speed slow and are not in the "example"
module)
Note if the user wants to skip filtered tests instead of not
running/showing them use the "--filter_action=skip" flag instead.
Expose the output of kunit.action=list option with flag "--list_tests" to
output a list of tests. Additionally, add flag "--list_tests_attr" to
output a list of tests and their attributes. These flags are useful to see
tests and test attributes without needing to run tests.
Example of the output of "--list_tests_attr":
example
example.test_1
example.test_2
# example.test_2.speed: slow
This output includes a suite, example, with two test cases, test_1 and
test_2. And in this instance test_2 has been marked as slow.
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
We don't run a linter regularly over kunit.py code (the default settings
on most don't like kernel style, e.g. tabs) so some of these imports
didn't get removed when they stopped being used.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
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 <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
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 <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
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 <rmoar@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
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: <missing>: 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 <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
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 <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
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 980ac3ad05 ("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 <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
With
$ kunit.py run --raw_output=all ...
you get the raw output from the kernel, e.g. something like
> TAP version 14
> 1..26
> # Subtest: time_test_cases
> 1..1
> ok 1 - time64_to_tm_test_date_range
> ok 1 - time_test_cases
But --raw_output=kunit or equivalently --raw_output, you get
> TAP version 14
> 1..26
> # Subtest: time_test_cases
> 1..1
> ok 1 - time64_to_tm_test_date_range
> ok 1 - time_test_cases
It looks less readable in my opinion, and it also isn't "raw output."
This is due to sharing code with kunit_parser.py, which wants to strip
leading whitespace since it uses anchored regexes.
We could update the kunit_parser.py code to tolerate leaading spaces,
but this patch takes the easier way out and adds a bool flag.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Context:
* kunit_kernel.py is importing kunit_parser.py just to use the
print_with_timestamp() function
* the parser is directly printing to stdout, which will become an issue
if we ever try to run multiple kernels in parallel
This patch introduces a kunit_printer.py file and migrates callers of
kunit_parser.print_with_timestamp() to call
kunit_printer.stdout.print_with_timestamp() instead.
Future changes:
If we want to support showing results for parallel runs, we could then
create new Printer's that don't directly write to stdout and refactor
the code to pass around these Printer objects.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
This primarily comes from running pylint over kunit tool code and
ignoring some warnings we don't care about.
If we ever got a fully clean setup, we could add this to run_checks.py,
but we're not there yet.
Fix things like
* Drop unused imports
* check `is None`, not `== None` (see PEP 8)
* remove redundant parens around returns
* remove redundant `else` / convert `elif` to `if` where appropriate
* rename make_arch_qemuconfig() param to base_kunitconfig (this is the
name used in the subclass, and it's a better one)
* kunit_tool_test: check the exit code for SystemExit (could be 0)
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
There should be no behavioral changes from this patch.
This patch removes redundant comment text, inlines a function used in
only one place, and other such minor tweaks.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Consider this invocation
$ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py parse <<EOF
TAP version 14
1..2
ok 1 - suite
# Subtest: no_tests_suite
# catastrophic error!
not ok 1 - no_tests_suite
EOF
It will have a 0 exit code even though there's a "not ok".
Consider this one:
$ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py parse <<EOF
TAP version 14
1..2
ok 1 - suite
not ok 1 - no_tests_suite
EOF
It will a non-zero exit code.
Why?
We have this line in the kunit_parser.py
> parent_test = parse_test_header(lines, test)
where we have special handling when we see "# Subtest" and we ignore the
explicit reported "not ok 1" status!
Also, NO_TESTS at a suite-level only results in a non-zero status code
where then there's only one suite atm.
This change is the minimal one to make sure we don't overwrite it.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
This logic depends on the kernel logging a message containing
'kunit test case crashed', but there is no corresponding logic to do so.
This is likely a relic of the revision process KUnit initially went
through when being upstreamed.
Delete it given
1) it's been missing for years and likely won't get implemented
2) the parser has been moving to be a more general KTAP parser,
kunit-only magic like this isn't how we'd want to implement it.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Before:
$ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py parse /dev/null
...
[ERROR] Test : invalid KTAP input!
After:
$ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py parse /dev/null
...
[ERROR] Test <missing>: could not find any KTAP output!
This error message gets printed out when extract_tap_output() yielded no
lines. So while it could be because of malformed KTAP output from KUnit,
it could also be due to not having any KTAP output at all.
Try and make the error message here more clear.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Before:
> Testing complete. Passed: 137, Failed: 0, Crashed: 0, Skipped: 36, Errors: 0
After:
> Testing complete. Ran 173 tests: passed: 137, skipped: 36
Even with our current set of statuses, the output is a bit verbose.
It could get worse in the future if we add more (e.g. timeout, kasan).
Let's only print the relevant ones.
I had previously been sympathetic to the argument that always
printing out all the statuses would make it easier to parse results.
But now we have commit acd8e8407b ("kunit: Print test statistics on
failure"), there are test counts printed out in the raw output.
We don't currently print out an overall total across all suites, but it
would be easy to add, if we see a need for that.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Co-developed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
David GowandShuah Khan
Thomas WeißschuhandShuah Khan
Rae MoarandShuah Khan
David GowandShuah Khan
Daniel LatypovandShuah Khan
Kees CookandShuah Khan