[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZdjMIVYp7Qb/Tt9d@finisterre.sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 16:47:29 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Cc: tiwai@...e.com, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
patches@...nsource.cirrus.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] ASoC: cs-amp-lib: Add KUnit test for calibration
helpers
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 03:39:10PM +0000, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
> +config SND_SOC_CS_AMP_LIB_TEST
> + tristate "KUnit test for Cirrus Logic cs-amp-lib"
> + depends on ACPI || COMPILE_TEST || KUNIT
Should this not depend unconditionally on KUNIT rather than KUNIT or
some other stuff? ie
depends on ACPI || COMPILE_TEST
depends on KUNIT
or equivalent.
> +#define TYPESAFE_ACTIVATE_STATIC_STUB_PTR(test, fn_ptr, replacement_fn) \
> + do { \
> + typecheck_fn(typeof(fn_ptr), replacement_fn); \
> + __kunit_activate_static_stub(test, fn_ptr, replacement_fn); \
> + } while (0)
Should this be somewhere more generic in the kunit headers?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists