From: Andrew Morton <akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Jeremy Kerr <jk-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Lingzhu Xiang <lxiang-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Dave Young <dyoung-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 v3] selftests: Add tests for efivarfs
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:50:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130212155005.36f9a718.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1360318129.7515.278.camel-ZqTwcBeJ+wsBof6jY8KHXm7IUlhRatedral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:08:49 +0000
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 18:05 +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> > However, the tests expose a bug at the moment, so run_tests will fail.
> > Matt will have that fixed soon though :)
>
> In which case, would it make more sense for me to take these tests
> through the efi tree? I'm fine either way, I'm just looking for the
> least surprising option.
I don't think it matters much at this stage. selftests is new and is
used by approximately zero people so if the tests fail, few will
notice. Let's just get it in there and get it settled down.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>
Cc: Jeremy Kerr <jk@ozlabs.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
Lingzhu Xiang <lxiang@redhat.com>, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 v3] selftests: Add tests for efivarfs
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:50:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130212155005.36f9a718.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1360318129.7515.278.camel@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>
On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:08:49 +0000
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 18:05 +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> > However, the tests expose a bug at the moment, so run_tests will fail.
> > Matt will have that fixed soon though :)
>
> In which case, would it make more sense for me to take these tests
> through the efi tree? I'm fine either way, I'm just looking for the
> least surprising option.
I don't think it matters much at this stage. selftests is new and is
used by approximately zero people so if the tests fail, few will
notice. Let's just get it in there and get it settled down.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-12 23:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-06 14:48 [PATCH 0/3 v3] selftests: Add efivarfs tests Jeremy Kerr
2013-02-06 14:48 ` [PATCH 3/3 v3] selftests/efivarfs: Add create-read test Jeremy Kerr
2013-02-06 14:48 ` [PATCH 1/3 v3] selftests: Add tests for efivarfs Jeremy Kerr
2013-02-07 23:13 ` Andrew Morton
2013-02-07 23:13 ` Andrew Morton
2013-02-08 10:02 ` [PATCH] Documentation: Add a simple doc for selftests Jeremy Kerr
2013-02-12 23:56 ` Andrew Morton
[not found] ` <20130207151333.f01d415c.akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2013-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH 1/3 v3] selftests: Add tests for efivarfs Jeremy Kerr
2013-02-08 10:05 ` Jeremy Kerr
[not found] ` <5114CE00.6050307-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2013-02-08 10:08 ` Matt Fleming
2013-02-08 10:08 ` Matt Fleming
[not found] ` <1360318129.7515.278.camel-ZqTwcBeJ+wsBof6jY8KHXm7IUlhRatedral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2013-02-12 23:50 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2013-02-12 23:50 ` Andrew Morton
[not found] ` <20130212155005.36f9a718.akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2013-02-13 7:32 ` Matt Fleming
2013-02-13 7:32 ` Matt Fleming
2013-02-12 23:48 ` Andrew Morton
2013-02-12 23:48 ` Andrew Morton
2013-02-06 14:48 ` [PATCH 2/3 v3] selftests/efivarfs: Add empty file creation test Jeremy Kerr
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130212155005.36f9a718.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm-de/tnxtf+jlsfhdxvbkv3wd2fqjk+8+b@public.gmane.org \
--cc=dyoung-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=jk-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=lxiang-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=matt.fleming-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.