From: shuah <shuah@kernel.org>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>,
Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
linux-um@lists.infradead.org,
Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com>,
"Bird, Timothy" <Tim.Bird@sony.com>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, shuah <shuah@kernel.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
wfg@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 00/19] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 17:15:59 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b38b118f-9bcb-c2fc-4365-0b94fde4e1ec@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFd5g46pzu=Bh5X7-ttfhTP+NYNDCAxN16OCGFxc5ohjTL-v0g@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/4/19 5:10 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM shuah <shuah@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>
> But then wouldn't we want to limit what KUnit changes are going into
> linux-kselftest next for v5.5? For example, we probably don't want to
> do anymore feature development on it until it is in v5.5, since the
> goal is to make it more stable, right?
>
> I am guessing that it will probably be fine, but it still sounds like
> we need to establish some ground rules, and play it *very* safe.
>
How about we identify a small number tests that can add value and focus
on them. I am thinking a number between 2 and 5. This way we get a feel
for the API, if it changes for the better great, if it doesn't have to,
then you know you already did a great job.
Does that sound reasonable to you?
thanks,
-- Shuah
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-04 23:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-23 9:02 [PATCH v18 00/19] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 01/19] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 02/19] kunit: test: add test resource management API Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 03/19] kunit: test: add string_stream a std::stream like string builder Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 04/19] kunit: test: add assertion printing library Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 05/19] kunit: test: add the concept of expectations Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 06/19] lib: enable building KUnit in lib/ Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 15:35 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 07/19] kunit: test: add initial tests Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 08/19] objtool: add kunit_try_catch_throw to the noreturn list Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 09/19] kunit: test: add support for test abort Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 10/19] kunit: test: add tests for kunit " Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 11/19] kunit: test: add the concept of assertions Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 12/19] kunit: test: add tests for KUnit managed resources Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 13/19] kunit: tool: add Python wrappers for running KUnit tests Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 14/19] kunit: defconfig: add defconfigs for building " Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 15/19] Documentation: kunit: add documentation for KUnit Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 15:47 ` Randy Dunlap
2019-09-23 18:06 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 19:49 ` Randy Dunlap
2019-09-23 21:18 ` shuah
2019-09-23 21:30 ` Randy Dunlap
2019-09-24 0:51 ` Randy Dunlap
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 16/19] MAINTAINERS: add entry for KUnit the unit testing framework Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 17/19] kernel/sysctl-test: Add null pointer test for sysctl.c:proc_dointvec() Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 18/19] MAINTAINERS: add proc sysctl KUnit test to PROC SYSCTL section Brendan Higgins
2019-09-23 9:02 ` [PATCH v18 19/19] kunit: fix failure to build without printk Brendan Higgins
2019-10-04 21:38 ` [PATCH v18 00/19] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-04 21:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-10-04 21:59 ` shuah
2019-10-04 22:27 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-10-04 22:47 ` shuah
2019-10-04 23:10 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-10-04 23:15 ` shuah [this message]
2019-10-04 23:29 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-04 23:52 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-10-04 23:57 ` shuah
2019-10-05 0:33 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-10-05 0:49 ` shuah
2019-10-05 1:18 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-10-06 16:54 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-06 17:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-10-07 8:40 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-10-07 14:42 ` shuah
2019-10-07 14:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-07 14:57 ` shuah
2019-10-07 8:20 ` Brendan Higgins
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b38b118f-9bcb-c2fc-4365-0b94fde4e1ec@kernel.org \
--to=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com \
--cc=Tim.Bird@sony.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=keescook@google.com \
--cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
--cc=kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=knut.omang@oracle.com \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=logang@deltatee.com \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=wfg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).