[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202503141345.0D3FB87E3@keescook>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 13:45:51 -0700
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/6] scanf: convert self-test to KUnit
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 02:29:40PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Fri 2025-03-07 06:27:33, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
> > This is one of just 3 remaining "Test Module" kselftests (the others
> > being bitmap and printf), the rest having been converted to KUnit. In
> > addition to the enclosed patch, please consider this an RFC on the
> > removal of the "Test Module" kselftest machinery.
> >
> > Tamir Duberstein (6):
> > scanf: implicate test line in failure messages
> > scanf: remove redundant debug logs
> > scanf: convert self-test to KUnit
> > scanf: break kunit into test cases
>
> Kees, could you please take the above 5 patches as well
> via the tree moving the KUNIT tests to lib/tests ?
I think you mean 4? Sure!
-Kees
>
> They seem to be ready for linux-next and the next merge window.
>
> > scanf: tidy header `#include`s
>
> This one is a bit controversial and might be added later.
>
> > scanf: further break kunit into test cases
>
> This one was just an attempt. But I personally think that
> it is not worth it.
>
> Best Regards,
> Petr
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists