On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 10:38 AM David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I like "location" better, personally. The attributes work is still > ongoing, and while there's some benefit to having "file" and "line" > separate (it could potentially simplify some implementation on the C > side), we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. Yeah, I felt it looked a bit better, but if later on it ends up making things too hard, then yeah, we can definitely simplify it. > This seems to be working well on the existing cases under kunit.py > here. I'll continue to play with it, but no worries on my end thus > far. Thanks for trying it out! > Thanks: while we're still arguing a bit about exactly what the format > of these will look like in the KUnit/KTAP attributes spec/patches, > what you've used matches what we've been proposing so far. > > Let's stick with <test name>.location for now, and change it if needed > when the attributes spec is finalised. Sounds good. > These are all (still) looking pretty good to me. If there are no > objections, I'd like to take these into kselftest/kunit as-is and if > we need to change anything (e.g. for consistency with attributes when > they land), do that as a follow-up. > > Thanks again, Miguel, for all the work getting this going! My pleasure -- and thanks for reviewing it so quickly and all your feedback! Cheers, Miguel
