[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGS_qxot1_+J3YCykkk0H1fZM6Cn6Pv4SFT6iCf9J7td1aH9HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 09:00:39 -0700
From: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev,
Enric Balletbo i Serra <eballetbo@...hat.com>,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Maíra Canal <mcanal@...lia.com>,
David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Input: Add KUnit tests for some of the input core
helper functions
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 4:12 AM Javier Martinez Canillas
<javierm@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com> writes:
>
> Hello,
>
> [...]
>
> >
> > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >
> > drivers/clk/.kunitconfig: warning: ignored by one of the .gitignore files
> > drivers/gpu/drm/tests/.kunitconfig: warning: ignored by one of the .gitignore files
> > drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/.kunitconfig: warning: ignored by one of the .gitignore files
> > drivers/hid/.kunitconfig: warning: ignored by one of the .gitignore files
> >>> drivers/input/tests/.kunitconfig: warning: ignored by one of the .gitignore files
>
> KUnit folks, what should we do about this? I believe the correct thing
> here would be for these dot-files to not be ignored by git.
>
> Not only to prevent these reports, but also to avoid the need to add
> them using `git add -f`, since is quite error prone and easy to miss.
>
> I was thinking about posting the following patch:
>
> From f1dc1733001682886458c23b676123635bc29da0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
> Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 13:04:42 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] .gitignore: Exclude KUnit config dot-files
Ah, I forgot/didn't realize lkp bot was complaining about .kunitconfig's.
Agreed, we should go with something like that.
As I noted in my reply on the patch, there was a previous patch to do
just the same thing here,
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20230127145708.12915-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com/
I'm not sure who is intended to pick up the patch, but maybe bringing
up the fact this causes spurious warnings will help argue for the
change.
Thanks,
Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists