From: Nam Cao <namcao@linutronix.de>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Thomas Weissschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>,
Tomas Glozar <tglozar@redhat.com>, John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>,
Wen Yang <wen.yang@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 16/17] selftests/verification: Rearrange the wwnr_printk test
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 08:18:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zezzxt9a.fsf@yellow.woof> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260625121440.116317-17-gmonaco@redhat.com>
Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com> writes:
> Simplify the test and run the steps expecting no reaction before the one
> expecting reactions.
This requirement is not clear from the code. I fear a new developer who
wants to introduce a new test case will easily trip over this, or even
us a few months from now.
Instead of this, how about each test case discards or ignores all
previous reactions?
Nam
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-10 6:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20260625121440.116317-1-gmonaco@redhat.com>
2026-06-25 12:14 ` [PATCH v3 15/17] selftests/verification: Fix wrong errexit assumption Gabriele Monaco
2026-07-09 8:14 ` Nam Cao
2026-07-09 17:10 ` Wen Yang
2026-06-25 12:14 ` [PATCH v3 16/17] selftests/verification: Rearrange the wwnr_printk test Gabriele Monaco
2026-07-09 17:08 ` Wen Yang
2026-07-10 8:31 ` Gabriele Monaco
2026-07-10 6:18 ` Nam Cao [this message]
2026-07-10 8:41 ` Gabriele Monaco
2026-06-25 12:14 ` [PATCH v3 17/17] selftests/verification: Add selftests for deadline and stall monitors Gabriele Monaco
2026-06-28 16:58 ` Wen Yang
2026-07-02 14:05 ` Gabriele Monaco
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=87zezzxt9a.fsf@yellow.woof \
--to=namcao@linutronix.de \
--cc=gmonaco@redhat.com \
--cc=jkacur@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tglozar@redhat.com \
--cc=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
--cc=wen.yang@linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox