2020-03-03 13:35:59 +00:00
|
|
|
# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
|
2021-04-30 02:03:08 +00:00
|
|
|
/asn1_compiler
|
lib: packing: add pack_fields() and unpack_fields()
This is new API which caters to the following requirements:
- Pack or unpack a large number of fields to/from a buffer with a small
code footprint. The current alternative is to open-code a large number
of calls to pack() and unpack(), or to use packing() to reduce that
number to half. But packing() is not const-correct.
- Use unpacked numbers stored in variables smaller than u64. This
reduces the rodata footprint of the stored field arrays.
- Perform error checking at compile time, rather than runtime, and return
void from the API functions. Because the C preprocessor can't generate
variable length code (loops), this is a bit tricky to do with macros.
To handle this, implement macros which sanity check the packed field
definitions based on their size. Finally, a single macro with a chain of
__builtin_choose_expr() is used to select the appropriate macros. We
enforce the use of ascending or descending order to avoid O(N^2) scaling
when checking for overlap. Note that the macros are written with care to
ensure that the compilers can correctly evaluate the resulting code at
compile time. In particular, care was taken with avoiding too many nested
statement expressions. Nested statement expressions trip up some
compilers, especially when passing down variables created in previous
statement expressions.
There are two key design choices intended to keep the overall macro code
size small. First, the definition of each CHECK_PACKED_FIELDS_N macro is
implemented recursively, by calling the N-1 macro. This avoids needing
the code to repeat multiple times.
Second, the CHECK_PACKED_FIELD macro enforces that the fields in the
array are sorted in order. This allows checking for overlap only with
neighboring fields, rather than the general overlap case where each field
would need to be checked against other fields.
The overlap checks use the first two fields to determine the order of the
remaining fields, thus allowing either ascending or descending order.
This enables drivers the flexibility to keep the fields ordered in which
ever order most naturally fits their hardware design and its associated
documentation.
The CHECK_PACKED_FIELDS macro is directly called from within pack_fields
and unpack_fields, ensuring that all drivers using the API receive the
benefits of the compile-time checks. Users do not need to directly call
any of the macros directly.
The CHECK_PACKED_FIELDS and its helper macros CHECK_PACKED_FIELDS_(0..50)
are generated using a simple C program in scripts/gen_packed_field_checks.c
This program can be compiled on demand and executed to generate the
macro code in include/linux/packing.h. This will aid in the event that a
driver needs more than 50 fields. The generator can be updated with a new
size, and used to update the packing.h header file. In practice, the ice
driver will need to support 27 fields, and the sja1105 driver will need
to support 0 fields. This on-demand generation avoids the need to modify
Kbuild. We do not anticipate the maximum number of fields to grow very
often.
- Reduced rodata footprint for the storage of the packed field arrays.
To that end, we have struct packed_field_u8 and packed_field_u16, which
define the fields with the associated type. More can be added as
needed (unlikely for now). On these types, the same generic pack_fields()
and unpack_fields() API can be used, thanks to the new C11 _Generic()
selection feature, which can call pack_fields_u8() or pack_fields_16(),
depending on the type of the "fields" array - a simplistic form of
polymorphism. It is evaluated at compile time which function will actually
be called.
Over time, packing() is expected to be completely replaced either with
pack() or with pack_fields().
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Co-developed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20241210-packing-pack-fields-and-ice-implementation-v10-3-ee56a47479ac@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
2024-12-10 20:27:12 +00:00
|
|
|
/gen_packed_field_checks
|
2022-08-04 10:20:37 +00:00
|
|
|
/generate_rust_target
|
2021-04-30 02:03:08 +00:00
|
|
|
/insert-sys-cert
|
|
|
|
|
/kallsyms
|
2020-09-08 04:27:08 +00:00
|
|
|
/module.lds
|
2021-04-30 02:03:08 +00:00
|
|
|
/recordmcount
|
rust: support running Rust documentation tests as KUnit ones
Rust has documentation tests: these are typically examples of
usage of any item (e.g. function, struct, module...).
They are very convenient because they are just written
alongside the documentation. For instance:
/// Sums two numbers.
///
/// ```
/// assert_eq!(mymod::f(10, 20), 30);
/// ```
pub fn f(a: i32, b: i32) -> i32 {
a + b
}
In userspace, the tests are collected and run via `rustdoc`.
Using the tool as-is would be useful already, since it allows
to compile-test most tests (thus enforcing they are kept
in sync with the code they document) and run those that do not
depend on in-kernel APIs.
However, by transforming the tests into a KUnit test suite,
they can also be run inside the kernel. Moreover, the tests
get to be compiled as other Rust kernel objects instead of
targeting userspace.
On top of that, the integration with KUnit means the Rust
support gets to reuse the existing testing facilities. For
instance, the kernel log would look like:
KTAP version 1
1..1
KTAP version 1
# Subtest: rust_doctests_kernel
1..59
# rust_doctest_kernel_build_assert_rs_0.location: rust/kernel/build_assert.rs:13
ok 1 rust_doctest_kernel_build_assert_rs_0
# rust_doctest_kernel_build_assert_rs_1.location: rust/kernel/build_assert.rs:56
ok 2 rust_doctest_kernel_build_assert_rs_1
# rust_doctest_kernel_init_rs_0.location: rust/kernel/init.rs:122
ok 3 rust_doctest_kernel_init_rs_0
...
# rust_doctest_kernel_types_rs_2.location: rust/kernel/types.rs:150
ok 59 rust_doctest_kernel_types_rs_2
# rust_doctests_kernel: pass:59 fail:0 skip:0 total:59
# Totals: pass:59 fail:0 skip:0 total:59
ok 1 rust_doctests_kernel
Therefore, add support for running Rust documentation tests
in KUnit. Some other notes about the current implementation
and support follow.
The transformation is performed by a couple scripts written
as Rust hostprogs.
Tests using the `?` operator are also supported as usual, e.g.:
/// ```
/// # use kernel::{spawn_work_item, workqueue};
/// spawn_work_item!(workqueue::system(), || pr_info!("x"))?;
/// # Ok::<(), Error>(())
/// ```
The tests are also compiled with Clippy under `CLIPPY=1`, just
like normal code, thus also benefitting from extra linting.
The names of the tests are currently automatically generated.
This allows to reduce the burden for documentation writers,
while keeping them fairly stable for bisection. This is an
improvement over the `rustdoc`-generated names, which include
the line number; but ideally we would like to get `rustdoc` to
provide the Rust item path and a number (for multiple examples
in a single documented Rust item).
In order for developers to easily see from which original line
a failed doctests came from, a KTAP diagnostic line is printed
to the log, containing the location (file and line) of the
original test (i.e. instead of the location in the generated
Rust file):
# rust_doctest_kernel_types_rs_2.location: rust/kernel/types.rs:150
This line follows the syntax for declaring test metadata in the
proposed KTAP v2 spec [1], which may be used for the proposed
KUnit test attributes API [2]. Thus hopefully this will make
migration easier later on (suggested by David [3]).
The original line in that test attribute is figured out by
providing an anchor (suggested by Boqun [4]). The original file
is found by walking the filesystem, checking directory prefixes
to reduce the amount of combinations to check, and it is only
done once per file. Ambiguities are detected and reported.
A notable difference from KUnit C tests is that the Rust tests
appear to assert using the usual `assert!` and `assert_eq!`
macros from the Rust standard library (`core`). We provide
a custom version that forwards the call to KUnit instead.
Importantly, these macros do not require passing context,
unlike the KUnit C ones (i.e. `struct kunit *`). This makes
them easier to use, and readers of the documentation do not need
to care about which testing framework is used. In addition, it
may allow us to test third-party code more easily in the future.
However, a current limitation is that KUnit does not support
assertions in other tasks. Thus we presently simply print an
error to the kernel log if an assertion actually failed. This
should be revisited to properly fail the test, perhaps saving
the context somewhere else, or letting KUnit handle it.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230420205734.1288498-1-rmoar@google.com/ [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20230707210947.1208717-1-rmoar@google.com/ [2]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/CABVgOSkOLO-8v6kdAGpmYnZUb+LKOX0CtYCo-Bge7r_2YTuXDQ@mail.gmail.com/ [3]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/ZIps86MbJF%2FiGIzd@boqun-archlinux/ [4]
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
2023-07-18 05:27:51 +00:00
|
|
|
/rustdoc_test_builder
|
|
|
|
|
/rustdoc_test_gen
|
2021-04-30 02:03:08 +00:00
|
|
|
/sign-file
|
|
|
|
|
/sorttable
|
2023-01-07 09:45:45 +00:00
|
|
|
/target.json
|
2021-04-30 02:03:08 +00:00
|
|
|
/unifdef
|