From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: shuah Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 00/19] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 17:15:59 -0600 Message-ID: References: <20190923090249.127984-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20191004213812.GA24644@mit.edu> <56e2e1a7-f8fe-765b-8452-1710b41895bf@kernel.org> <20191004222714.GA107737@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Brendan Higgins Cc: Linus Torvalds , "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Frank Rowand , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Josh Poimboeuf , Kees Cook , Kieran Bingham , Luis Chamberlain , Peter Zijlstra , Rob Herring , Stephen Boyd , Masahiro Yamada , devicetree , dri-devel , kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , linux-fsdevel , Linux Kbuild mailing list Lin List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 10/4/19 5:10 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM shuah wrote: >> >> On 10/4/19 4:27 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 03:59:10PM -0600, shuah wrote: >>>> On 10/4/19 3:42 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 2:39 PM Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> This question is primarily directed at Shuah and Linus.... >>>>>> >>>>>> What's the current status of the kunit series now that Brendan has >>>>>> moved it out of the top-level kunit directory as Linus has requested? >>>>> >>>> >>>> The move happened smack in the middle of merge window and landed in >>>> linux-next towards the end of the merge window. >>>> >>>>> We seemed to decide to just wait for 5.5, but there is nothing that >>>>> looks to block that. And I encouraged Shuah to find more kunit cases >>>>> for when it _does_ get merged. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Right. I communicated that to Brendan that we could work on adding more >>>> kunit based tests which would help get more mileage on the kunit. >>>> >>>>> So if the kunit branch is stable, and people want to start using it >>>>> for their unit tests, then I think that would be a good idea, and then >>>>> during the 5.5 merge window we'll not just get the infrastructure, >>>>> we'll get a few more users too and not just examples. >>> >>> I was planning on holding off on accepting more tests/changes until >>> KUnit is in torvalds/master. As much as I would like to go around >>> promoting it, I don't really want to promote too much complexity in a >>> non-upstream branch before getting it upstream because I don't want to >>> risk adding something that might cause it to get rejected again. >>> >>> To be clear, I can understand from your perspective why getting more >>> tests/usage before accepting it is a good thing. The more people that >>> play around with it, the more likely that someone will find an issue >>> with it, and more likely that what is accepted into torvalds/master is >>> of high quality. >>> >>> However, if I encourage arbitrary tests/improvements into my KUnit >>> branch, it further diverges away from torvalds/master, and is more >>> likely that there will be a merge conflict or issue that is not related >>> to the core KUnit changes that will cause the whole thing to be >>> rejected again in v5.5. >>> >> >> The idea is that the new development will happen based on kunit in >> linux-kselftest next. It will work just fine. As we accepts patches, >> they will go on top of kunit that is in linux-next now. > > But then wouldn't we want to limit what KUnit changes are going into > linux-kselftest next for v5.5? For example, we probably don't want to > do anymore feature development on it until it is in v5.5, since the > goal is to make it more stable, right? > > I am guessing that it will probably be fine, but it still sounds like > we need to establish some ground rules, and play it *very* safe. > How about we identify a small number tests that can add value and focus on them. I am thinking a number between 2 and 5. This way we get a feel for the API, if it changes for the better great, if it doesn't have to, then you know you already did a great job. Does that sound reasonable to you? thanks, -- Shuah