On Fri, 22 Dec 2023 at 05:47, Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 12/21/23 13:40, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Thu, 2023-12-21 at 13:06 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote: > >> On 12/21/23 12:39, Johannes Berg wrote: > >>>> > >>>> This patchset adds a couple of helpers for kunit as well as tests for > >>>> cfg80211 and mac80211 that use them. > >>> > >>> I can take this through the wireless tree, but then I'd like to have > >>> ACKs from kunit folks for the kunit patches: > >>> > >> > >> We have run into conflicts in the past with the kunit tree. I take the > >> kunit patches through linux-kselftest tree. I do want to make sure there > >> are no conflicts. I don't mind taking these through my tree. > > > > OK, fair enough. > > > > If you can still put it into 6.8, then I think you can also take the > > wireless tests, assuming they pass (I haven't run them in the posted > > version). I don't think we'll have conflicts there, we don't have much > > work in wireless that's likely to land for 6.8. > > > > Sounds good. > > David, will you be able to look at these patches and let me know if > I can apply for Linux 6.8-rc1. The two initial KUnit patches look fine, modulo a couple of minor docs issues and checkpatch warnings. 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. The remaining patches don't apply on top of the kunit branch as-is. 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'). 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. Cheers, -- David
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
