From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29268C4332F for ; Fri, 3 Nov 2023 15:33:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233086AbjKCPd7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Nov 2023 11:33:59 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44556 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233072AbjKCPd7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Nov 2023 11:33:59 -0400 Received: from ganesha.gnumonks.org (ganesha.gnumonks.org [IPv6:2001:780:45:1d:225:90ff:fe52:c662]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 421C7112 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 2023 08:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [78.30.35.151] (port=42010 helo=gnumonks.org) by ganesha.gnumonks.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qywB7-00FcCy-IX; Fri, 03 Nov 2023 16:33:51 +0100 Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2023 16:33:44 +0100 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Florian Westphal Cc: Thomas Haller , NetFilter Subject: Re: [PATCH nft 0/6] add infrastructure for unit tests Message-ID: References: <20231103111102.2801624-1-thaller@redhat.com> <20231103122641.GC8035@breakpoint.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231103122641.GC8035@breakpoint.cc> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 01:26:41PM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote: > Thomas Haller wrote: > > Thanks for sending an initial empty skeleton. > > > There are new new make targets: > > > > - "build-all" > > - "check" (runs "normal" tests, like unit tests and "tools/check-tree.sh"). > > - "check-more" (runs extra tests, like "tests/build") > > - "check-all" (runs "check" + "check-more") > > - "check-local" (a subset of "check") > > - "check-TESTS" (the unit tests) > > "check-unit" perhaps? TESTS isn't very descriptive. Also, > why CAPS? If this is some pre-established standard, then maybe just > document that in the commit changelog. > > Please don't do anything yet and wait for more comments, but > I would prefer 'make check' to run all tests that we have. We had a few tests that have been shown to be unstable. I just would like that I don't hit this when making the release and hold back a release because a test fails occasionally. If we go for `make check' then all test runs must be reliable.