On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:17 AM José Expósito <jose.exposito89@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > Here is the v3 of the series, including the documentation, previously > sent as a standalone patch [1], and changes suggested during review. > > Thanks a lot, > José Expósito > [+Maíra, Isabella, Tales, Magali for other drm,amdgpu,KUnit work.] These seem pretty good to me, but I'd echo Javier's comments about consistency with other DRM tests. In particular, we now have three concurrently developed DRM-related test suites, each doing things slightly differently: - This series is putting tests in drm/kunit, and providing a .kunitconfig in that directory, - The selftest ports here[1] are putting tests in drm/tests, and provide a separate Kconfig file, as well as a .kunitconfig - And the AMDGPU tests[2] are doing something totally different, with their own tests in drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/tests, which get compiled directly into the amdgpu module (and, at present, can't be run at all via kunit_tool) Certainly the general DRM tests should be in the same place, and use the same Kconfig entries, etc. A mix of the separate Kconfig file from [1] (if there's enough benefit to having the ability to turn on and off suites individually, which seems plausible) and the documentation from this series seems good to me. There's some basic guidelines around test nomenclature in Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/style.rst[3], though all of these patches seem pretty consistent with that. Either 'kunit' or 'tests' would work as a directory name: given the AMDGPU patches are using 'tests', maybe that's easier to stick with. Cheers, -- David [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220615135824.15522-1-maira.canal@xxxxxx/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20220608010709.272962-1-maira.canal@xxxxxx/ [3]: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kunit/style.html
