On 12/5/23 20:59, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
Nikolai Kondrashov <Nikolai.Kondrashov@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Introduce a new tag, 'Tested-with:', documented in the
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst file.
The tag is expected to contain the test suite command which was executed
for the commit, and to certify it passed. Additionally, it can contain a
URL pointing to the execution results, after a '#' character.
Prohibit the V: field from containing the '#' character correspondingly.
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Kondrashov <Nikolai.Kondrashov@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 10 ++++++++++
MAINTAINERS | 2 +-
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
I have to ask whether we *really* need to introduce yet another tag for
this. How are we going to use this information? Are we going to try to
make a tag for every way in which somebody might test a patch?
How I understand the purpose of this is that, first, people want to encourage
submitters to test their patches with the relevant test suites, and second, if
they do, to tell them they did. That is all.
The idea of Tested-with: is to specify *which* test was executed, so I don't
think we would need another tag.
However, I let people (all copied) who expressed interest in this in the first
place, and had this discussed earlier, chime in.
I have no specific interest in this particular way, I just want kernel testing
to improve. If it was for me, I'd rather encourage everyone to just use GitLab
or GitHub, post MRs/PRs (like millions of other projects do, including other
operating systems), have tests executed automatically, results recorded and
archived automatically, commits linked to those results automatically, and not
mess around with any tags :D
Nick
