On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 12:22 PM Tamir Duberstein <tamird@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 12:11 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 10:47:49AM -0500, Tamir Duberstein wrote: > > > Convert the scanf() self-test to a KUnit test. > > > > > > In the interest of keeping the patch reasonably-sized this doesn't > > > rename the file in accordance with usual kunit conventions nor does it > > > refactor the tests into proper parameterized tests - it's all one big > > > test case. > > > > Rename of the file may be done, but you need to use -M -C when formatting > > patch, in such a case the diff will be moderate in side and easy to review. > > If you prefer that I rename the file, I can do so in v2. > > Can you explain what you mean by using -M -C? The formatting was done > by hand, is there an automated tool? I tried using clang-format but > the result was a change on almost every line. > > Note also that though it looks like a lot of formatting has changed, > in reality almost every changed line has non-formatting changes due to > passing `test` around. Ah, you were referring to git format-patch. Sure, if you'd like me to rename the file, I'll use those flags in v2. > > P.S. The test modules in defconfig is something which puzzling me. I would > > remove all of them at once, if somebody wants debug configuration, they would > > specify it and use with help of merge_config or alike. > > I'm not sure what you mean? I removed instances of CONFIG_TEST_SCANF > from defconfig because that option no longer exists. > > Cheers. > > Tamir
