linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: Kunit: Use full path to .kunitconfig

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CABVgOSnB842E3dfnnPbmhsZq=yUUPTKSkY86d9aJRdpZ5uGoyw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:05:23 +0800
From:   David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
To:     Khalid Masum <khalid.masum.92@...il.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sadiya Kazi <sadiyakazi@...gle.com>,
        Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: Kunit: Use full path to .kunitconfig

On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 4:56 PM Khalid Masum <khalid.masum.92@...il.com> wrote:
>
> The fourth list item on writing test cases instructs adding Kconfig
> fragments to .kunitconfig, which should have been full path to the file
> (.kunit/.kunitconfig).
>
> Cc: Sadiya Kazi <sadiyakazi@...gle.com>
> Cc: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
> Suggested-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Khalid Masum <khalid.masum.92@...il.com>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
> - Update commit message
> - Make the instruction more descriptive
>

I confess, I think I prefer v1 overall here. Further notes below.

If there are no further objections, I'll continue to propose v1 for 6.1.

Cheers,
-- David


>  Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst
> index 867a4bba6bf6..69361065cda6 100644
> --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst
> @@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ Now we are ready to write the test cases.
>
>         obj-$(CONFIG_MISC_EXAMPLE_TEST) += example_test.o
>
> -4. Add the following lines to ``.kunitconfig``:
> +4. Add following configuration fragments to ``.kunit/.kunitconfig``:

At the risk of starting an argument, I actually preferred "the
following lines" here. "configuration fragments" doesn't quite
describe this perfectly, IMO. Maybe something like "config options"
would work better. Otherwise, just sticking with "lines" is probably
fine for the getting started guide. It's unlikely to confuse people,
and there's further discussion elsewhere in the documentation.

Regardless, we definitely should keep "the" here in "Add _the_
following". "Add following" is grammatically more dubious.

>
>  .. code-block:: none
>
> --
> 2.37.3
>

Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (4003 bytes)