From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Logan Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 18:26:11 -0600 Message-ID: <8c693b9f-43ec-8982-825c-cabfd61b659d@deltatee.com> References: <20190509133551.GD29703@mit.edu> <875c546d-9713-bb59-47e4-77a1d2c69a6d@gmail.com> <20190509214233.GA20877@mit.edu> <20190509233043.GC20877@mit.edu> <8914afef-1e66-e6e3-f891-5855768d3018@deltatee.com> <6d6e91ec-33d3-830b-4895-4d7a20ba7d45@gmail.com> <3faa022b-0b70-0375-aa6d-12ea83a2671f@deltatee.com> <20190514083819.GC230665@google.com> <5ff098a9-9424-901c-9017-d4492e306528@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5ff098a9-9424-901c-9017-d4492e306528-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Content-Language: en-CA List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: Frank Rowand , Brendan Higgins Cc: pmladek-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org, linux-doc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, amir73il-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, dri-devel-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org, Alexander.Levin-0li6OtcxBFHby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org, mpe-Gsx/Oe8HsFggBc27wqDAHg@public.gmane.org, linux-kselftest-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, shuah-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, robh-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-nvdimm-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, khilman-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, knut.omang-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, kieran.bingham-ryLnwIuWjnjg/C1BVhZhaw@public.gmane.org, wfg-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org, joel-U3u1mxZcP9KHXe+LvDLADg@public.gmane.org, rientjes-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, jdike-OPE4K8JWMJJBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, dan.carpenter-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kbuild-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Tim.Bird-7U/KSKJipcs@public.gmane.org, linux-um-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, rostedt-nx8X9YLhiw1AfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org, julia.lawall-L2FTfq7BK8M@public.gmane.org, kunit-dev-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org, Theodore Ts'o , richard-/L3Ra7n9ekc@public.gmane.org, sboyd-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, mcgrof-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, daniel-/w4YWyX8dFk@public.gmane.org, keescook-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 2019-05-14 6:14 p.m., Frank Rowand wrote: > The high level issue is to provide reviewers with enough context to be > able to evaluate the patch series. That is probably not very obvious > at this point in the thread. At this point I was responding to Logan's > response to me that I should be reading Documentation to get a better > description of KUnit features. I _think_ that Logan thought that I > did not understand KUnit features and was trying to be helpful by > pointing out where I could get more information. If so, he was missing > my intended point had been that patch 0 should provide more information > to justify adding this feature. Honestly, I lost track of wait exactly your point was. And, in my opinion, Brendan has provided over and above the information required to justify Kunit's inclusion. > One thing that has become very apparent in the discussion of this patch > series is that some people do not understand that kselftest includes > in-kernel tests, not just userspace tests. As such, KUnit is an > additional implementation of "the same feature". (One can debate > exactly which in-kernel test features kselftest and KUnit provide, > and how much overlap exists or does not exist. So don't take "the > same feature" as my final opinion of how much overlap exists.) So > that is a key element to be noted and explained. >>From my perspective, once we were actually pointed to the in-kernel kselftest code and took a look at it, it was clear there was no over-arching framework to them and that Kunit could be used to significantly improve those tests with a common structure. Based on my reading of the thread, Ted came to the same conclusion. I don't think we should block this feature from being merged, and for future work, someone can update the in-kernel kselftests to use the new framework. Logan