Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764265AbYBVDm2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:42:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753985AbYBVDmS (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:42:18 -0500 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:41917 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753784AbYBVDmR (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:42:17 -0500 Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:12:31 +0530 From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli To: sfr@canb.auug.org.au Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, ak@suse.de, arjan@linux.intel.com, Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , sam@ravnborg.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL?] Create and populate toplevel tests/ for kernel tests Message-ID: <20080222034231.GA6716@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: ananth@in.ibm.com References: <20080211104452.GB7944@in.ibm.com> <20080212164452.GA31096@infradead.org> <20080212132246.aac67ed1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080212223918.GA3927@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20080219192153.GA11948@uranus.ravnborg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080219192153.GA11948@uranus.ravnborg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 6118 Lines: 144 On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 08:21:53PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > Hi Anath. > > Linus did not pull this in the -rc1 to -rc2 timeframe > so please resubmit the patch serie one week into the > next merge window (when most of the trees has hit linus' tree > and Andrew has made his first merge). > > IF you need an extra eye balling then you can submit > a few weeks before the merge window opens. > Thats typical after an -rc with only a few patches. Stephen, The patchset in question is just a major code movement - basically to move all in-kernel tests to live under a toplevel tests/ directory. As such, all the stakeholders have acked the patchset, but it does look like this is a big enough change to be deferred to the next merge window. Given that there is general agreement about the patchset, could you please pull in the changes into the linux-next tree? Sam has setup a git tree for this and you can pull from: ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git Link to the thread: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/11/97 Thanks, Ananth > Thanks, > Sam > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 11:39:18PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > Hi Linus. > > > > Will you consider such a primary code-movement for -rc1 > > or shall we wait until next merge window? > > > > Had we hit -rc2 I would not have sent this pull req and > > feel free to flame me anyway. > > > > The rationale to get it merged is obviously to avoid > > merge conflicts and the only reason I ask is that I consider > > it a low risk patch. > > > > I have not included 8/8 since it was questioned and it > > will wait until next merge window. But the first 7 was > > straightforward. > > > > You can pull from: > > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git > > > > diffstat and shortlog below. > > I also included mail last with a few of the merge related comments. > > > > Sam > > > > Makefile | 1 + > > drivers/misc/Makefile | 1 - > > kernel/Makefile | 4 - > > lib/Kconfig.debug | 71 +-------------------- > > lib/Makefile | 1 - > > tests/Kconfig | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > tests/Makefile | 10 +++ > > {kernel => tests}/backtracetest.c | 0 > > {drivers/misc => tests}/lkdtm.c | 12 ++-- > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-hardirq.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-mutex.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-hardirq.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-softirq.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rsem.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-softirq.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-hardirq.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-softirq.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-hardirq.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-softirq.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wsem.h | 0 > > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest.c | 0 > > {kernel => tests}/rcutorture.c | 0 > > {kernel => tests}/rtmutex-tester.c | 2 +- > > {kernel => tests}/test_kprobes.c | 0 > > 27 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-) > > > > Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli (7): > > Create tests/ directory > > Move locking selftests to tests/ > > Move rcutorture to tests/ > > Move rtmutex-tests to tests/ > > Move lkdtm to tests/ > > Move kprobes smoke tests to tests/ > > Move backtrace tests to tests/ > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:22:46PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:44:52 -0500 > > > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 04:14:52PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote: > > > > > The following series of patches create and populate the toplevel tests/ > > > > > directory. This will henceforth be the place where all in-kernel tests > > > > > live. > > > > > > > > > > All patches against 2.6.25-rc1 and are just code movement without any > > > > > change in functionality. > > > > > > > > ACK to patches 1-7, and I agree with Ingo that the x86-specific test > > > > should stay under arch/x86. > > > > > > OK. But now is basically the worst time for me (or anyone else) to merge > > > large code-motion changes like this, because they need to be carried for > > > two months or more. > > > > > > And even though git can track renames, putting them into a git tree (say, > > > git-kbuild) won't help, because if some other git tree tries to modify a > > > file in its original place, I get to fix up the fallout. > > > > > > Which I _could_ do, and would do if the patches were particularly risky or > > > added/changed functionality or whatever. But they don't do that, and there > > > is little advantage in maintaining them for the >2 months. > > > > > > So. Please redo and resend the patches when we hit 2.6.25-rc6 or so? > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > (linux-next will largely fix all this: git will take care of the renames > > > and I'll just base the -mm queue on the consolidated linux-next. But we > > > aren't there yet). > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/