[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181130182203.GS18410@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 10:22:03 -0800
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>, shuah@...nel.org,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, brakmo@...com,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Bird, Timothy" <Tim.Bird@...y.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>, knut.omang@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 06/19] arch: um: enable running kunit from User Mode
Linux
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:05:34AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:37 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:26:03PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 1:37 PM Brendan Higgins
> > > <brendanhiggins@...gle.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Make minimum number of changes outside of the KUnit directories for
> > > > KUnit to build and run using UML.
> > >
> > > There's nothing in this patch limiting this to UML.
> >
> > Not that one, but the abort thing segv thing is, eventually.
> > To support other architectures we'd need to make a wrapper to that
> > hack which Brendan added, and then allow each os to implement
> > its own call, and add an asm-generic helper.
>
> I've not looked into why this is needed, but can't you make the abort
> support optional and arches can select it when they support it.
Its why I have asked for it to be properly documented. The patches in no
way illustrate *why* such thing is done. And if we are going to
potentially have other archs do something similar best to make it
explicit.
> At
> least before, the DT unittests didn't need this to run and shouldn't
> depend on it after converting to kunit.
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists