On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 05:21:00PM +0800, David Gow wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 02:53:10PM +0800, David Gow wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:02 PM Linus Torvalds > > > <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... > > > > Don't send me any more rename patches until your tools can actually do renames. > > > > > My other thought is that this sort of patchset really makes more sense > > > to push through the kselftest/kunit branch anyway, as all of the > > > changes were really more KUnit related than anything else. Does it > > > make sense to re-submit this that way? > > > > I think it makes sense because this is driven by rules set up by kselftest/kunit. > > My main concern here is to have cmdline_kunit in the tree (it is a new file). > > Renaming is up to you, I just wanted to be consistent with names and KUnit > > documentation. > > It looks like the cmdline_kunit changes have been merged now, so it's > a relief that those weren't held up: I agree that they're the more > important changes. Yes, they are in, thanks Linus! > I do think renaming things to match the new convention is a good idea > (so thanks again for doing that), but it's not exactly an urgent fix. > My preference is that these get added to one of the kunit branches in > the kselftest repo, so they can be picked up when convenient. This > should just be the first three patches in this series: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20201112180732.75589-1-andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > I'd expect those to still apply pretty cleanly, but I haven't actually > checked yet. They won't apply after v5.11-rc1 due to cmdline_kunit entry. I can rebase after rc1 and send it to KUnit/kselftest mailing lists. Andrew, please drop these patches from your quilt and thanks for carrying them. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
