From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rdunlap@infradead.org (Randy Dunlap) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 12:27:14 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 2/6] genalloc: selftest In-Reply-To: References: <20180211031920.3424-1-igor.stoppa@huawei.com> <20180211031920.3424-3-igor.stoppa@huawei.com> Message-ID: To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On 02/11/18 12:22, Philippe Ombredanne wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Igor Stoppa wrote: >> Introduce a set of macros for writing concise test cases for genalloc. >> >> The test cases are meant to provide regression testing, when working on >> new functionality for genalloc. >> >> Primarily they are meant to confirm that the various allocation strategy >> will continue to work as expected. >> >> The execution of the self testing is controlled through a Kconfig option. >> >> Signed-off-by: Igor Stoppa > > > >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/include/linux/genalloc-selftest.h >> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > nit... For a comment in .h this line should be instead its own comment > as the first line: >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ Why are we treating header files (.h) differently than .c files? Either one can use the C++ "//" comment syntax. > > >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/lib/genalloc-selftest.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,400 @@ >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > And for a comment in .c this line should use C++ style as the first line: > >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > Please check the docs for this (I know this can feel surprising but > this has been debated at great length on list) > > Thank you! > -- ~Randy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html