On 12/22/23 03:09, Johannes Berg wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for taking a look!
On Fri, 2023-12-22 at 18:02 +0800, David Gow wrote:
The two initial KUnit patches look fine, modulo a couple of minor docs
issues and checkpatch warnings.
I can run checkpatch (even if I can't always take it seriously), but do
you want to comment more specifically wrt. the docs?
They apply cleanly, and I doubt
there's much chance of there being a merge conflict for 6.8 -- there
are no other changes to the parameterised test macros, and the skb
stuff is in its own file.
Right.
The remaining patches don't apply on top of the kunit branch as-is.
Oh, OK. That makes some sense though, we've had a number of changes in
the stack this cycle before. I somehow thought the tests were likely
standalone, but apparently not.
I
haven't had a chance to review them properly yet; the initial glance I
had didn't show any serious issues (though I think checkpatch
suggested some things to 'check').
I can check.
So (once those small issues are finished), I'm okay with the first two
patches going in via either tree. The remaining ones are probably best
done via the wireless tree, as they seem to depend on some existing
patches there, so maybe it makes sense to push everything via
wireless.
If not through wireless I doubt we'll get it synchronized for 6.8,
though of course it's also not needed for 6.8 to have the extra unit
tests :)
I'll let Shuah decide.
Thank you David for the reviews.
johannes, Please take these through wireless - makes it easier for all
of us.
Acked-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
thanks,
-- Shuah
