From: "Nicolás Antinori via B4 Relay" <devnull+nico.antinori.7.gmail.com@kernel.org>
To: "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@google.com>,
"Benno Lossin" <lossin@kernel.org>,
"Boqun Feng" <boqun@kernel.org>,
"Brendan Higgins" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
"Daniel Almeida" <daniel.almeida@collabora.com>,
"Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>,
"David Gow" <david@davidgow.net>, "Gary Guo" <gary@garyguo.net>,
"Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@kernel.org>,
"Onur Özkan" <work@onurozkan.dev>
Cc: "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com>,
"Andreas Hindborg" <a.hindborg@kernel.org>,
"Björn Roy Baron" <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
"Burak Emir" <burak.emir@gmail.com>,
"Rae Moar" <raemoar63@gmail.com>,
"Tamir Duberstein" <tamird@kernel.org>,
"Trevor Gross" <tmgross@umich.edu>,
"Yury Norov" <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org,
"Nicolás Antinori" <nico.antinori.7@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/3] rust: kunit: support #[should_panic] and same test name with different #[cfg(...)]
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 13:59:00 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261029-rust_kunit_v6_send-v2-0-5ce551efc48e@gmail.com> (raw)
This patch series intends to implement two features for KUnit tests
written in Rust. The work is based on a TODO comment made in the
`bitmap.rs` module [1].
Changelog:
v2:
- Added more tests in `rust/kernel/kunit.rs` testing Sashiko findings
and changes.
- Solved Sashiko: "[Low] kunit: spurious "try faulted" error logs for
successful #[should_panic] tests": Solved by adding
`rust_should_panic` in `kunit_try_catch` C struct to check if the test
is expected to panic and act accordingly. Dismissed what I first talked
about in [3].
- Solved Sashiko: "[Medium] kunit: assert! macro in #[should_panic]
tests causes unexpected failure": Solved by making `kunit_assert`
macro aware if the test should panic and act accordingly. Dismissed what
I first talked about in [3]
- Solved Sashiko: "[Low] kunit: missing diagnostic log for
#[should_panic] tests that fail to panic": Added an error message when
a test that was expected to panic do not
- Solved Sashiko: "[Low] kunit: dead_code error for test wrappers with
inactive cfg": Solved by moving the #[cfg(..)] attributes on top of
the wrapper functions
- Dismissed Sashiko: "[Medium] rust: bitmap: memory leak in
owned_bitmap_out_of_bounds() test panic": Not sure if can be done
anything. If I am not mistaken this is the same issue as stated here [4].
Sashiko report links: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260930-rust_kunit_v4-v1-0-e3b0d45311dd@gmail.com?part=1
v1:
- Removed 'stringification' of test names (to avoid clash of names for
different configurations now a number is appended).
- Added bool `rust_should_panic` attribute to `kunit_attributes` C
struct
- Removed #[panic_handler] in Rust side, checking for aborts in the C
side (`kunit_run_case_catch_errors` function). This allow to catch
panics triggered, for example in a Rust function that called a panicking
C function.
- Now the tests that have an inactive #[cfg(..)] do not appear un the
KUnit execution summary as ignored, they just do not run.
Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260930-rust_kunit_v4-v1-0-e3b0d45311dd@gmail.com/
- RFC patch: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/cover.1789500084.git.nico.antinori.7@gmail.com/
1. Supporting `#[should_panic]` [2]:
KUnit tests in Rust follow the user-space syntax, but at the moment
`#[should_panic]` is not supported. The first patch of this series adds
support for the attribute (only in its basic form, `#[should_panic =
"message"]` is not supported yet).
The way it is supported is by adding a new boolean property called
`rust_should_panic` to `kunit_attributes` struct in kunit/test.h and in
`kunit_attributes` in kunit/try-catch.h and check for the
`try_catch->try_result` code and the named flag to detect if there was a
panic in `kunit_try_catch_run` function.
2. Allow same test name with different #[cfg(...)]:
When testing `#[should_panic]` in `bitmap.rs` (check the last patch of
the series) I found that the test that was supposed to panic had the
same name as another one, but they were run on different configurations.
This caused the following compilation error:
ERROR:root:error[E0428]: the name `kunit_rust_wrapper_owned_bitmap_out_of_bounds` is defined multiple times
--> ../rust/kernel/bitmap.rs:503:1
|
503 | #[macros::kunit_tests(rust_kernel_bitmap)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ `kunit_rust_wrapper_owned_bitmap_out_of_bounds` redefined here
|
= note: `kunit_rust_wrapper_owned_bitmap_out_of_bounds` must be defined only once in the value namespace of this module
= note: this error originates in the attribute macro `macros::kunit_tests` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
Now, only the tests with an active `#[cfg(...)]` will be executed by the
runner. Tests with an inactive `#[cfg(...)]` will not appear in the
report since they are not added to the TEST_CASES array.
[1] https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/blob/fd73f4a6659897191fa0d40695fe370925dd3780/rust/kernel/bitmap.rs#L592-L600
[2] https://doc.rust-lang.org/rust-by-example/testing/unit_testing.html#testing-panics
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DM41PHVITKOG.3I6P2X8048BEP@gmail.com/
[4] https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/blob/fd73f4a6659897191fa0d40695fe370925dd3780/rust/kernel/kunit.rs#L129-L136
Signed-off-by: Nicolás Antinori <nico.antinori.7@gmail.com>
---
Nicolás Antinori (3):
rust: kunit: add #[should_panic] support
rust: kunit: allow same test name with different #[cfg(...)]
rust: bitmap: kunit: uncomment owned_bitmap_out_of_bounds panic case
include/kunit/test.h | 1 +
include/kunit/try-catch.h | 3 ++
lib/kunit/attributes.c | 18 ++++++++++++
lib/kunit/kunit-test.c | 3 ++
lib/kunit/test.c | 2 ++
lib/kunit/try-catch-impl.h | 2 ++
lib/kunit/try-catch.c | 14 +++++----
rust/kernel/bitmap.rs | 21 +++++++------
rust/kernel/kunit.rs | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
rust/macros/kunit.rs | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
10 files changed, 164 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 65ba8f34ec886ec72b2c07ddc8cf3d815c32869d
change-id: 20261029-rust_kunit_v6_send-d0353c1615f9
Best regards,
--
Nicolás Antinori <nico.antinori.7@gmail.com>
next reply other threads:[~2026-10-29 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-29 16:59 Nicolás Antinori via B4 Relay [this message]
2026-10-29 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] rust: kunit: add #[should_panic] support Nicolás Antinori via B4 Relay
2026-10-29 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] rust: kunit: allow same test name with different #[cfg(...)] Nicolás Antinori via B4 Relay
2026-10-29 16:59 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] rust: bitmap: kunit: uncomment owned_bitmap_out_of_bounds panic case Nicolás Antinori via B4 Relay
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261029-rust_kunit_v6_send-v2-0-5ce551efc48e@gmail.com \
--to=devnull+nico.antinori.7.gmail.com@kernel.org \
--cc=a.hindborg@kernel.org \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
--cc=bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
--cc=burak.emir@gmail.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel.almeida@collabora.com \
--cc=david@davidgow.net \
--cc=gary@garyguo.net \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lossin@kernel.org \
--cc=nico.antinori.7@gmail.com \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=raemoar63@gmail.com \
--cc=rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tamird@kernel.org \
--cc=tmgross@umich.edu \
--cc=work@onurozkan.dev \
--cc=yury.norov@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®