linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] drm/tests: Add KUnit tests for drm_mode_create_dvi_i

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

Message-ID: <ki4pqpxiww5oylbanlfzflv5raxeykrty2ubx5sgysiqrh55pr@lkgaq5lz72fj>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 11:49:56 +0100
From: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
To: Dipam Turkar <dipamt1729@...il.com>
Cc: maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, tzimmermann@...e.de, 
	airlied@...il.com, daniel@...ll.ch, mairacanal@...eup.net, javierm@...hat.com, 
	arthurgrillo@...eup.net, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/tests: Add KUnit tests for
 drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties()

On Sat, Dec 23, 2023 at 03:59:33PM +0530, Dipam Turkar wrote:
> I needed some help regarding introducing a separate test for testing if the
> function still works if called a second time as suggested. Wouldn't we need
> to call it on the same object we called in the first time. So, that will
> bring redundancy in the two functions. Is this correct? Or am I
> understanding this wrong?

There will be redundancy indeed, but you're also not testing the same
thing so it's fine.

A test should be there to test one thing and one thing only.

Maxime

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)