lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v18 00/19] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework
From
Date
On 10/4/19 4:27 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 03:59:10PM -0600, shuah wrote:
>> On 10/4/19 3:42 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 2:39 PM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This question is primarily directed at Shuah and Linus....
>>>>
>>>> What's the current status of the kunit series now that Brendan has
>>>> moved it out of the top-level kunit directory as Linus has requested?
>>>
>>
>> The move happened smack in the middle of merge window and landed in
>> linux-next towards the end of the merge window.
>>
>>> We seemed to decide to just wait for 5.5, but there is nothing that
>>> looks to block that. And I encouraged Shuah to find more kunit cases
>>> for when it _does_ get merged.
>>>
>>
>> Right. I communicated that to Brendan that we could work on adding more
>> kunit based tests which would help get more mileage on the kunit.
>>
>>> So if the kunit branch is stable, and people want to start using it
>>> for their unit tests, then I think that would be a good idea, and then
>>> during the 5.5 merge window we'll not just get the infrastructure,
>>> we'll get a few more users too and not just examples.
>
> I was planning on holding off on accepting more tests/changes until
> KUnit is in torvalds/master. As much as I would like to go around
> promoting it, I don't really want to promote too much complexity in a
> non-upstream branch before getting it upstream because I don't want to
> risk adding something that might cause it to get rejected again.
>
> To be clear, I can understand from your perspective why getting more
> tests/usage before accepting it is a good thing. The more people that
> play around with it, the more likely that someone will find an issue
> with it, and more likely that what is accepted into torvalds/master is
> of high quality.
>
> 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.

thanks,
-- Shuah

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-10-05 00:48    [W:0.067 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site