From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23D42C4360C for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 23:31:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEA2320873 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 23:31:04 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DEA2320873 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=mit.edu Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from new-ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A04010FC3264; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 16:32:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=18.9.28.11; helo=outgoing.mit.edu; envelope-from=tytso@mit.edu; receiver= Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB98810FC3262 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 16:32:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from callcc.thunk.org (guestnat-104-133-0-98.corp.google.com [104.133.0.98] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id x94NTuAQ024308 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 4 Oct 2019 19:29:57 -0400 Received: by callcc.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id CCF8D42088C; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 19:29:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 19:29:55 -0400 From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" To: shuah Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 00/19] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Message-ID: <20191004232955.GC12012@mit.edu> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Message-ID-Hash: SHYEY33QC7DAX7Y7HDUEJPZX3SC3R7CW X-Message-ID-Hash: SHYEY33QC7DAX7Y7HDUEJPZX3SC3R7CW X-MailFrom: tytso@mit.edu X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation CC: Brendan Higgins , Linus Torvalds , Frank Rowand , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Josh Poimboeuf , Kees Cook , kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, Luis Chamberlain , Peter Zijlstra , robh@kernel.org, Stephen Boyd , Masahiro Yamada , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel , kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , linux-fsdevel , Linux Kbuild mailing list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , linux-nvdimm , linux-um@lists.infradead.org, Sasha Levin , Tim.Bird@sony.com, Amir Goldstein , Dan Carpenter , Daniel Vetter , jdike@addtoit.com, Joel Stanley , Julia Lawall , khilman@baylibre.com, knut.omang@oracle.com, Michael Ellerman , Petr Mladek , Randy Dunlap , Richard Weinberger , David Rientjes , Steven Rostedt , wfg@linux.intel.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 04:47:09PM -0600, shuah wrote: > > 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. I don't see how this would work. If I add unit tests to ext4, they would be in fs/ext4. And to the extent that I need to add test mocks to allow the unit tests to work, they will involve changes to existing files in fs/ext4. I can't put them in the ext4.git tree without pulling in the kunit changes into the ext4 git tree. And if they ext4 unit tests land in the kunit tree, it would be a receipe for large numbers of merge conflicts. - Ted _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org