Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-148735-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:53:34 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>
To: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com>
Cc: keescook@chromium.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
	skhan@linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] string: Implement KUnit test for str*cmp functions
Message-ID: <Zh_ibi_Y6xogktg-@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20240417135415.614284-1-ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com>
 <Zh_cgnMOFHuP-lKu@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <10085ec8-0109-444c-bce4-d0b0ef1a4164@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <10085ec8-0109-444c-bce4-d0b0ef1a4164@gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 03:46:44PM +0100, Ivan Orlov wrote:
> On 4/17/24 15:28, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 02:54:15PM +0100, Ivan Orlov wrote:

..

> > >   lib/strcmp_kunit.c | 170 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > Why is not part of the existing string_kunit.c?
> 
> There are already 2 other KUnit tests in `lib/` covering different groups of
> string functions separately (lib/strscpy_kunit.c, lib/strcat_kunit.c), so
> this patch just follows this pattern. I believe it makes sense: the tests
> are separated to cover one specific group of string functions with a similar
> purpose

We have handful of the string functions, are you going to have a file per
function? Isn't it way too many?

P.S>
Having those does not prove it's a correct approach. I would rather expect
somebody to incorporate those into string_kunit.c.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko