From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx176.postini.com [74.125.245.176]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5C4DA6B005A for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 19:09:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by qadz32 with SMTP id z32so702917qad.14 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:09:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120713154519.60a686e8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1342139517-3451-1-git-send-email-walken@google.com> <1342139517-3451-6-git-send-email-walken@google.com> <20120713131514.86ab4df4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20120713154519.60a686e8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:09:11 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] rbtree: performance and correctness test From: Michel Lespinasse Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: aarcange@redhat.com, dwmw2@infradead.org, riel@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, daniel.santos@pobox.com, axboe@kernel.dk, ebiederm@xmission.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 13 Jul 2012 15:33:35 -0700 Michel Lespinasse wrote: >> Ah, I did not realize we had a precedent for in-tree kernel test modules. > > hm, well, just because that's what we do now doesn't mean that it was a > good idea ;) These things arrive as a result of individual developers > doing stuff in their little directories and no particular thought was > put into overall structure. > > It could be that it would be better to put all these tests into a > central place, rather than sprinkling them around the tree. If so, > then your patch can lead the way, and we (ie: I) prod past and future > developers into getting with the program. > > otoh, perhaps in-kernel test modules will rely on headers and constants > which are private to the implementation directory. So perhaps > sprinkled-everywhere is the best approach. I think it is at least reasonable. Where we could improve, however, would be on the Kconfig side of things. >> I don't think my proposal was significantly better than this >> precedent, so I'll just adjust my patch to conform to it: >> - move rbtree_test.c to lib/ >> - modify just lib/Makefile and lib/Kconfig.debug to get the module built. >> >> Will send a replacement patch for this (so you can drop that one patch >> from the stack and replace it with) > > OK, you could do that too. That way you avoid the problem and we can > worry about it later (if ever), as a separate activity. Going to attach as a reply to this email. -- Michel "Walken" Lespinasse A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org