linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] kunit: Fix formatting of KUNIT tests to meet the 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 PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Sun, 18 Apr 2021 15:39:39 -0400
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Nico Pache <npache@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, brendanhiggins@...gle.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
        mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        broonie@...nel.org, davidgow@...gle.com, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
        mptcp@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] kunit: Fix formatting of KUNIT tests to meet the
 standard

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 04:58:03AM -0400, Nico Pache wrote:
> There are few instances of KUNIT tests that are not properly defined.
> This commit focuses on correcting these issues to match the standard
> defined in the Documentation.

The word "standard" seems to be over-stating things.  The
documentation currently states, "they _usually_ have config options
ending in ``_KUNIT_TEST'' (emphasis mine).  I can imagine that there
might be some useful things we can do from a tooling perspective if we
do standardize things, but if you really want to make it a "standard",
we should first update the manpage to say so, and explain why (e.g.,
so that we can easily extract out all of the kunit test modules, and
perhaps paint a vision of what tools might be able to do with such a
standard).

Alternatively, the word "standard" could perhaps be changed to
"convention", which I think more accurately defines how things work at
the moment.

> Nico Pache (6):
>   kunit: ASoC: topology: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
>   kunit: software node: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
>   kunit: ext4: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
>   kunit: lib: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
>   kunit: mptcp: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
>   m68k: update configs to match the proper KUNIT syntax

Also, "adhear" is not the correct spelling; the correct spelling is
"adhere" (from the Latin verb "adhaerere", "to stick", as in "to hold
fast or stick by as if by gluing", which then became "to bind oneself
to the observance of a set of rules or standards or practices").

       		       	      	       		 - Ted