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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 19:33:18 -0300 From: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@...eup.net> To: Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech> Cc: Isabella Basso <isabbasso@...eup.net>, magalilemes00@...il.com, tales.aparecida@...il.com, mwen@...lia.com, andrealmeid@...eup.net, siqueirajordao@...eup.net, Trevor Woerner <twoerner@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, brendanhiggins@...gle.com, Arthur Grillo <arthur.grillo@....br>, michal.winiarski@...el.com, José Expósito <jose.exposito89@...il.com>, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drm/tests: Change "igt_" prefix to "test_drm_" Hi Maxime, On 9/1/22 09:55, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 09:42:10AM -0300, Maíra Canal wrote: >> With the introduction of KUnit, IGT is no longer the only option to run >> the DRM unit tests, as the tests can be run through kunit-tool or on >> real hardware with CONFIG_KUNIT. >> >> Therefore, remove the "igt_" prefix from the tests and replace it with >> the "test_drm_" prefix, making the tests' names independent from the tool >> used. >> >> Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@...eup.net> >> >> --- >> v1 -> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20220830211603.191734-1-mairacanal@riseup.net/ >> - Change "drm_" prefix to "test_drm_", as "drm_" can be a bit confusing (Jani Nikula). > > I appreciate it's a bit of a bikeshed but I disagree with this. The > majority of the kunit tests already out there start with the framework > name, including *all* the examples in the kunit doc. Plus, it's fairly > obvious that it's a test, kunit is only about running tests in the first > place. Would it be better to keep it as "drm_"? Currently, I don't think it is appropriate to hold the "igt_" prefix, as the tests are not IGT exclusive, but I don't have a strong opinion on using the "drm_" or the "test_drm" prefixes. Best Regards, - Maíra Canal > > Maxime >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists