On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 05:03:08PM +0200, Sander Vanheule wrote:
> This series fixes the reported issues, and implements the suggested
> improvements, for the version of the cpumask tests [1] that was merged
> with commit c41e8866c28c ("lib/test: introduce cpumask KUnit test
> suite").
>
> These changes include fixes for the tests, and better alignment with the
> KUnit style guidelines.
I wrote a couple comments, but the series looks OK to me in general.
So for 2, 3 and 5:
Acked-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx>
It's named as 'fix', but it fixes a test, and the kernel code itself
looks correct. So, do you want to take it into 6.0-rc, or in 6.1?
I'm OK to do it this way or another, but for later -rc's it may look
too noisy. And I'm not sure where to put a threshold.
Thanks,
Yury
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/85217b5de6d62257313ad7fde3e1969421acad75.1659077534.git.sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> Changes since v1:
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1660068429.git.sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> - Collect tags
> - Rewrite commit message of "lib/test_cpumask: drop cpu_possible_mask
> full test"
> - Also CC KUnit mailing list
>
> Sander Vanheule (5):
> lib/test_cpumask: drop cpu_possible_mask full test
> lib/test_cpumask: fix cpu_possible_mask last test
> lib/test_cpumask: follow KUnit style guidelines
> lib/cpumask_kunit: log mask contents
> lib/cpumask_kunit: add tests file to MAINTAINERS
>
> MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> lib/Kconfig.debug | 7 +++++--
> lib/Makefile | 2 +-
> lib/{test_cpumask.c => cpumask_kunit.c} | 13 +++++++++++--
> 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> rename lib/{test_cpumask.c => cpumask_kunit.c} (90%)
>
> --
> 2.37.2
