HID selftests question for now: On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 05:00:53PM +0100, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > I am not entirely clear on which plan I want to have for userspace. > > > I'd like to have libinput on board, but right now, Peter's stance is > > > "not in my garden" (and he has good reasons for it). > > > So my initial plan is to cook and hold the bpf programs in hid-tools, > > > which is the repo I am using for the regression tests on HID. > > > > Why isn't the hid regression tests in the kernel tree also? That would > > allow all of the testers out there to test things much easier than > > having to suck down another test repo (like Linaro and 0-day and > > kernelci would be forced to do). > > 2 years ago I would have argued that the ease of development of > gitlab.fd.o was more suited to a fast moving project. > > Now... The changes in the core part of the code don't change much so > yes, merging it in the kernel might have a lot of benefits outside of > what you said. The most immediate one is that I could require fixes to > be provided with a test, and merge them together, without having to > hold them until Linus releases a new version. Yes, having a test be required for a fix is a great idea. Many subsystems do this already and it helps a lot. > If nobody complains of having the regression tests in python with > pytest and some Python 3.6+ features, that is definitely something I > should look for. Look at the tools/testing/selftests/ directory today. We already have python3 tests in there, and as long as you follow the proper TAP output format, all should be fine. The tc-testing python code in the kernel trees seems to do that and no one has complained yet :) thanks, greg k-h
