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=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 DF4D4C0044C for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 20:02:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F02920862 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 20:02:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Bj3yar3P" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9F02920862 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726689AbeKHFeZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2018 00:34:25 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:53728 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726027AbeKHFeZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2018 00:34:25 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.87] (c-24-9-64-241.hsd1.co.comcast.net [24.9.64.241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 959EF20818; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 20:02:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1541620951; bh=wTMYW0KJzzpHR61jC1KnlLkuPTJ6PdggDIghMR/gkxw=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Bj3yar3PEtsScDZ8o9zccTFwAtnWOdVNsPWDHah/25MuvEHYIwNt29qduaM1G/p/f Cn/uS/0WR6o2mziv4QM/c4YDr06bds8KqslxOFtuZAOO5AujzYxSU5YPjsXIsIb7QF +Y3QfqrZHMjlLNkumlhVl1rhMca/kBOvc1DNl+Rw= Subject: Re: [RFC v2 01/14] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core To: Brendan Higgins Cc: Greg KH , Kees Cook , mcgrof@kernel.org, Joel Stanley , mpe@ellerman.id.au, joe@perches.com, brakmo@fb.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, Tim.Bird@sony.com, khilman@baylibre.com, Julia Lawall , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , jdike@addtoit.com, richard@nod.at, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, Daniel Vetter , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Rob Herring , dan.j.williams@intel.com, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, Shuah Khan References: <20181023235750.103146-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20181023235750.103146-2-brendanhiggins@google.com> <017b111f-d960-c1ef-46ae-eb0eb639fe5b@kernel.org> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: <0149d343-937c-1a99-10ff-d2bcb546e49b@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 13:02:29 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/06/2018 06:28 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 11:44 AM Shuah Khan wrote: >> >> On 10/23/2018 05:57 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > >>> + * Example: >>> + * >>> + * .. code-block:: c >>> + * >>> + * void add_test_basic(struct test *test) >>> + * { >>> + * TEST_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1, add(1, 0)); >>> + * TEST_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2, add(1, 1)); >>> + * TEST_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, add(-1, 1)); >>> + * TEST_EXPECT_EQ(test, INT_MAX, add(0, INT_MAX)); >>> + * TEST_EXPECT_EQ(test, -1, add(INT_MAX, INT_MIN)); >>> + * } >>> + * >>> + * static struct test_case example_test_cases[] = { >>> + * TEST_CASE(add_test_basic), >>> + * {}, >>> + * }; >>> + * >>> + */ >>> +struct test_case { >>> + void (*run_case)(struct test *test); >>> + const char name[256]; >>> + >>> + /* private: internal use only. */ >>> + bool success; >>> +}; >>> + >> >> Introducing a prefix kunit_* might be a good idea for the API. >> This comment applies to the rest of patches as well. > > What about kunit_* instead of test_* and kmock_* instead of mock_*? > Does that seem reasonable? > kunit_* would work well. thanks, -- Shuah