Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 20 Aug 2022 15:06:11 -0700
From:   Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
To:     Sander Vanheule <sander@svanheule.net>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
        David Gow <davidgow@google.com>,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ma=EDra?= Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] cpumask: KUnit test suite fixes and improvements
Message-ID: <YwFa0xiM/b0N5X0w@yury-laptop>
References: <cover.1661007338.git.sander@svanheule.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cover.1661007338.git.sander@svanheule.net>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 05:03:08PM +0200, Sander Vanheule wrote:
> This series fixes the reported issues, and implements the suggested
> improvements, for the version of the cpumask tests [1] that was merged
> with commit c41e8866c28c ("lib/test: introduce cpumask KUnit test
> suite").
> 
> These changes include fixes for the tests, and better alignment with the
> KUnit style guidelines.

I wrote a couple comments, but the series looks OK to me in general.
So for 2, 3 and 5:
Acked-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>

It's named as 'fix', but it fixes a test, and the kernel code itself
looks correct. So, do you want to take it into 6.0-rc, or in 6.1?

I'm OK to do it this way or another, but for later -rc's it may look
too noisy. And I'm not sure where to put a threshold.

Thanks,
Yury
 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/85217b5de6d62257313ad7fde3e1969421acad75.1659077534.git.sander@svanheule.net/
> 
> Changes since v1:
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1660068429.git.sander@svanheule.net/
> - Collect tags
> - Rewrite commit message of "lib/test_cpumask: drop cpu_possible_mask
>   full test"
> - Also CC KUnit mailing list
> 
> Sander Vanheule (5):
>   lib/test_cpumask: drop cpu_possible_mask full test
>   lib/test_cpumask: fix cpu_possible_mask last test
>   lib/test_cpumask: follow KUnit style guidelines
>   lib/cpumask_kunit: log mask contents
>   lib/cpumask_kunit: add tests file to MAINTAINERS
> 
>  MAINTAINERS                             |  1 +
>  lib/Kconfig.debug                       |  7 +++++--
>  lib/Makefile                            |  2 +-
>  lib/{test_cpumask.c => cpumask_kunit.c} | 13 +++++++++++--
>  4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>  rename lib/{test_cpumask.c => cpumask_kunit.c} (90%)
> 
> -- 
> 2.37.2