Re: [PATCH] lib: Convert UUID runtime test to KUnit

From: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
To: "André Almeida" <andrealmeid@collabora.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
	"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	KUnit Development <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	~lkcamp/patches@lists.sr.ht, nfraprado@collabora.com,
	leandro.ribeiro@collabora.com,
	Vitor Massaru Iha <vitor@massaru.org>,
	lucmaga@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: Convert UUID runtime test to KUnit
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2021 08:54:13 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABVgOS=QMTjFEPqgBab27sTRdnW6PLG_bcD20ui_nC2wK_GAPA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210605215215.171165-1-andrealmeid@collabora.com>

On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 5:52 AM André Almeida <andrealmeid@collabora.com> wrote:
>
> Remove custom functions for testing and use KUnit framework. Test cases
> and test data remains the same.
>
> Signed-off-by: André Almeida <andrealmeid@collabora.com>
> ---

Thanks! It's always exciting to see more tests using KUnit.

Note that the names here (filename, suite name, and Kconfig entry
name) don't match what we usually recommend for KUnit tests:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kunit/style.html

Given that this is an existing test, it is definitely okay to keep the
old names if you think it'd break something, but if there's no issue
it may be worth renaming them. The test suite name (which is new
anyway) ideally shouldn't end in "-test": just "uuid" is best.

I know there are quite a few existing tests which don't adhere to
these perfectly yet, but ideally new ones will if it's convenient.

Otherwise, this looks great. I've run it here, and it worked well and
picked up on any deliberate errors I introduced.

So this is
Tested-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David