Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:07:19 +0300
From: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] bitmap: Add bitmap_zero()/bitmap_clear() test
 cases
Message-ID: <20180111120719.johxsu3jg6chbsjz@yury-thinkpad>
References: <20180109172430.87452-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <20180110093405.zhz3smxy264kmghv@yury-thinkpad>
 <1515589905.7000.847.camel@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1515589905.7000.847.camel@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jan 2018 12:07:34.3826 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f7b66e0a-244a-43bb-0fa3-08d558ebe6e0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 711e4ccf-2e9b-4bcf-a551-4094005b6194
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN4PR0701MB3838
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 03:11:45PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 12:34 +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> > Hi Andy,
> > 
> > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 07:24:27PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Explicitly test bitmap_zero() and bitmap_clear() functions.
> 
> > > +	/* Known way to set all bits */
> > 
> > Nit: if you start your comments with capital, proceed that way till
> > the end.
> 
> Right, I have to keep the original style. I'll check this.
> 
> > I don't understand what patch #4 is doing in this series. At the first
> > glance, it may be applied separately.
> 
> It fixes test failures found by patch 2 in the series.
> The idea is similar to TDD.

So with current order, patch 2 introduces regression that is fixed in
patch 4, is my understanding correct?

This is not the best idea because it will break bisectability. I would
recommend you to change the order and move patch #4 to the begin.

Also it would be reasonable to leave a note in patch 2 comment that it
causes regression if applied alone.

Yury