From: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
To: shuah <shuah@kernel.org>
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@micro soft.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>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
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 16:10:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFd5g46pzu=Bh5X7-ttfhTP+NYNDCAxN16OCGFxc5ohjTL-v0g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ad800337-1ae2-49d2-e715-aa1974e28a10@kernel.org>
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.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-04 23:10 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 [this message]
2019-10-04 23:15 ` shuah
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='CAFd5g46pzu=Bh5X7-ttfhTP+NYNDCAxN16OCGFxc5ohjTL-v0g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=Alexander.Levin@micro \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@google.com \
--cc=kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.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=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--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).