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;
From:   SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
To:     David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Cc:     SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>, brendanhiggins@google.com,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add source tree entry for kunit
Date:   Tue, 13 Jun 2023 00:01:30 +0000
Message-Id: <20230613000130.85038-1-sj@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CABVgOS=HpS9g+YwLth2xpY9i2u3DxLzbbPoqnJshhAhU2fB_pA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 07:54:01 +0800 David Gow <davidgow@google.com> wrote:

> [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1120 bytes --]
> 
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2023 at 02:05, SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Patches for kunit are managed in linux-kselftest tree before merged into
> > the mainline, but the MAINTAINERS section for kunit doesn't have the
> > entry for the tree.  Add it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
> > ---
> 
> Thanks very much.

My pleasure! :)

> 
> Given KUnit work happens in the kunit and kunit-fixes branches here,
> should we note those as well?

That makes sense, I will add those in the commit message with the next version
of this.

> 
> -- David
> 
> 
> >  MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index ce5f343c1443..8a217438956b 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -11327,6 +11327,7 @@ L:      linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
> >  L:     kunit-dev@googlegroups.com
> >  S:     Maintained
> >  W:     https://google.github.io/kunit-docs/third_party/kernel/docs/
> > +T:     git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest.git
> 
> Should we also mention the branch here:
> git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest.git
> kunit

I think so.  Would you prefer having only one 'T' line with 'kunit' branch?
Or, both branches like below?  I have no strong opinion.

T:     git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest.git kunit
T:     git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest.git kunit-fixes


Thanks,
SJ

> 
> >  F:     Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/
> >  F:     include/kunit/
> >  F:     lib/kunit/
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
>