On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 1:50 AM Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi, but this is v3 [1]. Then there was v4 [2] (with a prerequisity [3]) with
> many changes after feedback with kunit folks, which would be better. We could
> apply v4 as improvement later but there would be extra churn (even the test .c
> file is named differently). Merging v4 directly would make more sense.
>
> Anyway "[patch 031/178] slub: remove resiliency_test() function" (which the
> kunit test replaces) can go either way as that code is dead and broken.
I've removed patches 30 and 31 from the queue.
Linus
