From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:50982 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726242AbfEBLFQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 May 2019 07:05:16 -0400 Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 13:05:13 +0200 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Message-ID: <20190502110513.GF12416@kroah.com> References: <20190501230126.229218-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20190502105053.GA12416@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190502105053.GA12416@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Brendan Higgins Cc: frowand.list@gmail.com, keescook@google.com, kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, mcgrof@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, sboyd@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com, Tim.Bird@sony.com, amir73il@gmail.com, dan.carpenter@oracle.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, jdike@addtoit.com, joel@jms.id.au, julia.lawall@lip6.fr, khilman@baylibre.com, knut.omang@oracle.com, logang@deltatee.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, pmladek@suse.com, richard@nod.at, rientjes@google.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, wfg@linux.intel.com On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 12:50:53PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 04:01:09PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote: > > ## TLDR > > > > I rebased the last patchset on 5.1-rc7 in hopes that we can get this in > > 5.2. > > That might be rushing it, normally trees are already closed now for > 5.2-rc1 if 5.1-final comes out this Sunday. > > > Shuah, I think you, Greg KH, and myself talked off thread, and we agreed > > we would merge through your tree when the time came? Am I remembering > > correctly? > > No objection from me. > > Let me go review the latest round of patches now. Overall, looks good to me, and provides a framework we can build on. I'm a bit annoyed at the reliance on uml at the moment, but we can work on that in the future :) Thanks for sticking with this, now the real work begins... Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman