[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201022190526.GN4077@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 22:05:26 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
Cc: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>,
David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: add basic KUnit test for lib/math
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 11:53:50AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 8:06 AM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 10:47:50AM -0700, Daniel Latypov wrote:
...
> > You need to put detailed comments in the code to have it as real example how to
> > create the KUnit test. But hey, it will mean that documentation sucks. So,
> > please update documentation to cover issues that you found and which motivated
> > you to create these test cases.
>
> I don't entirely disagree; leaning too heavily on code examples can be
> detrimental to docs. That being said, when I use other people's code,
> I often don't even look at the docs. So, I think the ideal is to have
> both.
Why do we have docs in the first place?
For test cases I think it's a crucial part, because tests many time are written
by newbies, who would like to understand all under-the-hood stuff. You imply
that they need to drop themselves into the code directly. It's very harsh to
begin with Linux kernel development, really.
> > Summarize this, please create usable documentation first.
So, no go for this w/o documentation being up-to-date. Or be honest to
everybody, it's sucks it needs to be removed. Then I will get your point.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists