[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201202160214.GA390058@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 11:02:14 -0500
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arpitha Raghunandan <98.arpi@...il.com>,
Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
"Bird, Tim" <Tim.Bird@...y.com>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/2] kunit: Support for Parameterized Testing
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 02:22:22PM -0800, 'Brendan Higgins' via KUnit Development wrote:
>
> Looks good to me. I would definitely like to pick this up. But yeah,
> in order to pick up 2/2 we will need an ack from either Ted or Iurii.
>
> Ted seems to be busy right now, so I think I will just ask Shuah to go
> ahead and pick this patch up by itself and we or Ted can pick up patch
> 2/2 later.
I have been paying attention to this patch series, but I had presumed
that this was much more of a kunit change than an ext4 change, and the
critical bits was a review of the kunit infrastructure. I certainly
have no objection to changing the ext4 test to use the new
parameterized testing, and if you'd like me to give a quick review,
I'll take a quick look. I assume, Brendan, that you've already tried
doing a compile and run test of the patch series, so I'm not going to
do that?
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists