On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 5:43 PM Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 5:41 AM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 6:14 PM Brendan Higgins > > <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 4:40 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 11/28/18 12:56 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > >> diff --git a/drivers/of/Kconfig b/drivers/of/Kconfig > > > > >> index ad3fcad4d75b8..f309399deac20 100644 > > > > >> --- a/drivers/of/Kconfig > > > > >> +++ b/drivers/of/Kconfig > > > > >> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ if OF > > > > >> config OF_UNITTEST > > > > >> bool "Device Tree runtime unit tests" > > > > >> depends on !SPARC > > > > >> + depends on KUNIT > > > > > Unless KUNIT has depends, better to be a select here. > > > > > > > > That's just style or taste. I would prefer to use depends > > > > instead of select, but that's also just my preference. > > > > > > I prefer depends too, but Rob is the maintainer here. > > > > Well, we should be consistent, not the follow the whims of each maintainer. > > Sorry, I don't think that came out the way I meant it. I don't really > think we are consistent on this point across the kernel, and I don't > feel very strongly about the point, so I was just looking to follow > the path of least resistance. (I also just assumed Rob would keep us > consistent within drivers/of/.) I meant across unittests, we should be consistent. All unittests do either "depends on KUNIT" or "select KUNIT". The question I would ask is does KUNIT need to be user visible or is useful to enable without any unittests enabled? With depends, a user has 2 options to go enable vs. 1 with select. But if you want a global kill switch to turn off all unittests, then depends works better. > I figure if we are running unit tests from the test runner script or > from an automated system, you won't be hunting for dependencies for a > single test every time you want to run a test, so select doesn't make > it easier to configure in most imagined use cases. > > KUNIT hypothetically should not depend on anything, so select should > be safe to use. > > On the other hand, if we end up being wrong on this point and KUnit > gains widespread adoption, I would prefer not to be in a position > where I have to change a bunch of configs all over the kernel because > this example got copied and pasted. You'll be so happy that 100s of tests have been created using kunit, it won't be a big deal. :) In any case, I wouldn't spend more time on this. Rob
