On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 11:39:00PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > On 10/18/24 at 05:52pm, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 05:51:09PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 09:52:47PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > > > On 10/18/24 at 03:22pm, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 10:18:42AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: ... > > > > > Can we get more test cases in the respective module, please? > > > > > > > > Do you mean testing CXL memory in kexec/kdump? No, we can't. Kexec/kdump > > > > test cases basically is system testing, not unit test or module test. It > > > > needs run system and then jump to 2nd kernel, vm can be used but it > > > > can't cover many cases existing only on baremetal. Currenly, Redhat's > > > > CKI is heavily relied on to test them, however I am not sure if system > > > > with CXL support is available in our LAB. > > > > > > > > Not sure if I got you right. > > > > > > I meant since we touch resource.c, we should really touch resource_kunit.c > > > *in addition to*. > > > > And to be more clear, there is no best time to add test cases than > > as early as possible. So, can we add the test cases to the (new) APIs, > > so we want have an issue like the one this patch fixes? > > I will have a look at kernel/resource_kunit.c to see if I can add > something for walk_system_ram_res_rev(). Thanks. Thank you! I will appreciate that. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
