Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
To:     David Gow <davidgow@google.com>, Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        rafael@kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
        mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com, davem@davemloft.net,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>, mptcp@lists.linux.dev
References: <cover.1618388989.git.npache@redhat.com>
 <0fa191715b236766ad13c5f786d8daf92a9a0cf2.1618388989.git.npache@redhat.com>
 <e26fbcc8-ba3e-573a-523d-9c5d5f84bc46@tessares.net>
 <CABVgOSm9Lfcu--iiFo=PNLCWCj4vkxqAqO0aZT9B2r3Kw5Fhaw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@tessares.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] kunit: mptcp: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
Message-ID: <b57a1cc8-4921-6ed5-adb8-0510d1918d28@tessares.net>
Date:   Thu, 15 Apr 2021 09:10:10 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABVgOSm9Lfcu--iiFo=PNLCWCj4vkxqAqO0aZT9B2r3Kw5Fhaw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi David,

Thank you for your very clear reply!

On 15/04/2021 08:01, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:25 PM Matthieu Baerts
> <matthieu.baerts@tessares.net> wrote:
>> Up to the KUnit maintainers to decide ;-)
> 
> To summarise my view: personally, I'd prefer things the way this patch
> works: have everything end in _KUNIT_TEST, even if that enables a
> couple of suites. The extra 'S' on the end isn't a huge problem if you
> have a good reason to particularly want to keep it, though: as long as
> you don't have something like _K_UNIT_VERIFICATION or something
> equally silly that'd break grepping for '_KUNIT_TEST', it's fine be
> me.

Indeed it makes sense: we don't need to split nor to have a meta-Kconfig 
entry. We can then remove the extra 'S' and update our tests suite:

Reviewed-by: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@tessares.net>

I see that the whole series has been marked as "Not Applicable" on 
Netdev's patchwork:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/0fa191715b236766ad13c5f786d8daf92a9a0cf2.1618388989.git.npache@redhat.com/

Like patch 1/6, I can apply it in MPTCP tree and send it later to 
net-next with other patches.
Except if you guys prefer to apply it in KUnit tree and send it to 
linux-next?

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions
www.tessares.net