From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pb0-x230.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c01::230]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1V3Inz-0002q4-Fg for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 04:42:04 +0000 Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id md4so3439092pbc.35 for ; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:41:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51F4A0FE.1020007@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:11:34 +0530 From: Vikram Narayanan MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Akinobu Mita Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 1/7] mtd: tests: introduce mtd_test module References: <1374891256-20248-1-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com> <1374891256-20248-2-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com> <51F4A069.7020902@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51F4A069.7020902@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse , Adrian Hunter , Artem Bityutskiy List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 28/Jul/2013 10:09 AM, Vikram Narayanan wrote: > On 28/Jul/2013 7:51 AM, Akinobu Mita wrote: >> 2013/7/28 Brian Norris : >>> I like this idea. There is definitely too much code duplication. >>> >>> However, there is an important tradeoff here: now to run these (very >>> simple) tests, we have a two-step process*: >>> >>> insmod mtd_test.ko >>> insmod mtd_.ko dev= >>> >>> [* modprobe would solve this problem, but these tests are often >>> compiled and run by hand, sometimes on systems without the convenience >>> of modprobe ] >>> >>> We could still accomplish the reduction in (source) code duplication >>> by simply including these simple routines in a header, then the code >>> would be compiled into each test module. I realize this isn't >>> typically the "best" way to share code, but since these are just test >>> modules and really don't need to be optimized for code size, I think >>> it is worth avoiding the extra step of inserting another module. >> >> I understand your concern and I'm going to change this series to move >> all these functions into a header file. But I'll wait other opinion >> for a while. > > You can refer this. > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.mtd/43933 > And also Artem's feedback here > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.mtd/44007 > > However, I didn't get much time to make this patch better as Artem > suggested. > > ~Vikram Sorry, Now updated the thread with correct links. ~Vikram