linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] kunit: mptcp: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 15 Apr 2021 09:10:10 +0200
From:   Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>
To:     David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Nico Pache <npache@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        rafael@...nel.org, linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, mptcp@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] kunit: mptcp: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard

Hi David,

Thank you for your very clear reply!

On 15/04/2021 08:01, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:25 PM Matthieu Baerts
> <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net> wrote:
>> Up to the KUnit maintainers to decide ;-)
> 
> To summarise my view: personally, I'd prefer things the way this patch
> works: have everything end in _KUNIT_TEST, even if that enables a
> couple of suites. The extra 'S' on the end isn't a huge problem if you
> have a good reason to particularly want to keep it, though: as long as
> you don't have something like _K_UNIT_VERIFICATION or something
> equally silly that'd break grepping for '_KUNIT_TEST', it's fine be
> me.

Indeed it makes sense: we don't need to split nor to have a meta-Kconfig 
entry. We can then remove the extra 'S' and update our tests suite:

Reviewed-by: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>

I see that the whole series has been marked as "Not Applicable" on 
Netdev's patchwork:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/0fa191715b236766ad13c5f786d8daf92a9a0cf2.1618388989.git.npache@redhat.com/

Like patch 1/6, I can apply it in MPTCP tree and send it later to 
net-next with other patches.
Except if you guys prefer to apply it in KUnit tree and send it to 
linux-next?

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions
www.tessares.net