[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <874ivwmfn9.ffs@tglx>
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2025 11:20:10 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>, Shuah Khan
<shuah@...nel.org>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, Peter Zijlstra
<peterz@...radead.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Sebastian
Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-dev@...lia.com, Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar
<mingo@...hat.com>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] selftests/futex: Add ASSERT_ macros
On Fri, Jun 27 2025 at 17:23, André Almeida wrote:
> Em 26/06/2025 19:07, Thomas Gleixner escreveu:
>> On Thu, Jun 26 2025 at 14:11, André Almeida wrote:
>>
>>> Create ASSERT_{EQ, NE, TRUE, FALSE} macros to make test creation easier.
>>
>> What's so futex special about this that it can't use the same muck in
>>
>> tools/testing/selftests/kselftest_harness.h
>>
>
> My previous version of this test used kselftest_harness.h, but Shuah
> request to keep consistency and don't use this header, giving that the
> rest of futex test doesn't use it:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/fe02f42b-7ba8-4a3b-a86c-2a4a7942fd3b@linuxfoundation.org/
So proliferating duplicate and pointlessly different code is the
preferred option here?
Cleaning up the existing mess first before adding more would be too
sensible, right?
I'm lost for words, which is an achievement.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists