Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: 1ZPztXO1pg7WeFbQWvdnR19QN/3scV/MyT3n823RD+ZwjE1U7JI8+2RJ/RVZrmdv25ZNcSSp3x
 C1rlyn2cAdTQ==
IronPort-SDR: W9JF7A0t9YQMmFylVi0vver7sM5vwAcgBCSLRzHzTL7+3/fTF4zJZfcMvgmajOvTrzElQc4bBx
 rWzsHkck5mng==
Date:   Thu, 22 Oct 2020 22:05:26 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Cc:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@google.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: add basic KUnit test for lib/math
Message-ID: <20201022190526.GN4077@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20201019224556.3536790-1-dlatypov@google.com>
 <CABVgOS=Kucf3QV=jpo3cLDgG38WvnuKpzEdP_RkBtRwHHPLe3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGS_qxpX0Do+z-wzCC=twbt-htL=Jkqvrk4L4rKTtXFPfX-TCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201022150648.GH4077@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <CAFd5g45o2G-bUvHNk2ehNuCsK6zVjN+rp88TyNmuJpfLbQi07g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAFd5g45o2G-bUvHNk2ehNuCsK6zVjN+rp88TyNmuJpfLbQi07g@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 11:53:50AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 8:06 AM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 10:47:50AM -0700, Daniel Latypov wrote:

...

> > You need to put detailed comments in the code to have it as real example how to
> > create the KUnit test. But hey, it will mean that documentation sucks. So,
> > please update documentation to cover issues that you found and which motivated
> > you to create these test cases.
> 
> I don't entirely disagree; leaning too heavily on code examples can be
> detrimental to docs. That being said, when I use other people's code,
> I often don't even look at the docs. So, I think the ideal is to have
> both.

Why do we have docs in the first place?
For test cases I think it's a crucial part, because tests many time are written
by newbies, who would like to understand all under-the-hood stuff. You imply
that they need to drop themselves into the code directly. It's very harsh to
begin with Linux kernel development, really.

> > Summarize this, please create usable documentation first.

So, no go for this w/o documentation being up-to-date. Or be honest to
everybody, it's sucks it needs to be removed. Then I will get your point.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko