linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v3 18/19] of: unittest: split out a couple of test cases from unittest

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]

Message-ID: <88fe0546-7850-5bb4-9673-b1aef2dccb3e@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:57:09 -0800
From:   Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
To:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>, mcgrof@...nel.org,
        shuah@...nel.org, Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
        mpe@...erman.id.au, joe@...ches.com, brakmo@...com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, Tim.Bird@...y.com, khilman@...libre.com,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        jdike@...toit.com, richard@....at, linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org,
        kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com, Knut Omang <knut.omang@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 18/19] of: unittest: split out a couple of test cases
 from unittest

On 12/5/18 3:54 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:58 AM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Brendan,
>>
>> On 11/28/18 11:36 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
>>> Split out a couple of test cases that these features in base.c from the
>>> unittest.c monolith. The intention is that we will eventually split out
>>> all test cases and group them together based on what portion of device
>>> tree they test.
>>
>> Why does splitting this file apart improve the implementation?
> 
> This is in preparation for patch 19/19 and other hypothetical future
> patches where test cases are split up and grouped together by what
> portion of DT they test (for example the parsing tests and the
> platform/device tests would probably go separate files as well). This
> patch by itself does not do anything useful, but I figured it made
> patch 19/19 (and, if you like what I am doing, subsequent patches)
> easier to review.

I do not see any value in splitting the devicetree tests into
multiple files.

Please help me understand what the benefits of such a split are.

Thanks,

Frank