linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] iio: light: Add gain-time-scale helpers

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZA8lNBPCB4BNnfUq@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Mar 2023 15:29:24 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel@...labora.com>,
        Paul Gazzillo <paul@...zz.com>,
        Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>,
        Zhigang Shi <Zhigang.Shi@...eon.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] iio: light: Add gain-time-scale helpers

On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 03:11:52PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> On 3/13/23 14:40, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 12, 2023 at 05:08:48PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Sun, 12 Mar 2023 17:06:38 +0000
> > > Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:

...

> > > Ah. I forgot the tests that don't have a device so can't use devm.
> > 
> > Why not? I have seen, IIRC, test cases inside the kernel that fakes the device
> > for that.
> 
> I'd appreciated any pointer for such an example if you have one at hand. (I
> can do the digging if you don't though!)
> 
> I am not a fan of unit tests. They add huge amount of inertia to
> development, and in worst case, they stop people from contributing where
> improving a feature requires test code modification(s). And harder the test
> code is to understand, worse the unwanted side-effects. Also, harder the
> test code is to read, more time and effort it requires to analyze a test
> failure... Hence, I am _very_ conservative what comes to adding size of test
> code with anything that is not strictly required.
> 
> After that being said, unit tests are a great tool when carefully used - and
> I assume/hope stubbing a device for devm_ tests does not add much extra...
> But let me see if I can find an example :)

drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c ?

(somewhere underneath:

 ret = platform_driver_register(&fake_platform_driver);

which suggests... what exactly? :-)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko