[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200608184426.GB899@rikard>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 20:44:26 +0200
From: Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
Syed Nayyar Waris <syednwaris@...il.com>,
William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@...il.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] bits: Add tests of GENMASK
On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 11:08:04AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 11:34 PM Rikard Falkeborn
> <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add tests of GENMASK and GENMASK_ULL.
> >
> > A few test cases that should fail compilation are provided under ifdef.
> >
>
> Thank you very much!
>
> > * New patch. First time I wrote a KUnittest so may be room for
> > improvements...
>
> Have you considered to unify them with existing test_bitops.h?
test_bitops.c seems to be tests for macros/functions in bitops.h, so I
figured it would make more sense to add tests of bits.h in test_bits.c.
But I don't have a strong opinion about it. If you prefer, I'll move
them to test_bitops.c.
Rikard
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists