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. Thanks! johannes
