On 10/4/19 5:10 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM shuah <shuah@xxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxx> 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
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
