From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754129AbbCBRqU (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:46:20 -0500 Received: from lists.s-osg.org ([54.187.51.154]:59486 "EHLO lists.s-osg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751237AbbCBRqT (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:46:19 -0500 Message-ID: <54F4A1E9.6030608@osg.samsung.com> Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 10:46:17 -0700 From: Shuah Khan Organization: Samsung Open Source Group User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Stultz CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Prarit Bhargava , Thomas Gleixner , Richard Cochran Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/19] Add timekeeping tests to kernel selftest References: <1424903544-26855-1-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> <54F498B1.6090409@osg.samsung.com> <54F49C17.8080804@osg.samsung.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/02/2015 10:39 AM, John Stultz wrote: > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 03/02/2015 10:14 AM, John Stultz wrote: >>> Other then that, I've got a few compiler warning cleanup and a fix for >>> CROSS_COMPILE, so I'll resbumit the set tomorrow or later this week. >>> So let me know if there are any other changes you'd like and I'll roll >>> those in. >> >> Please use kselftest.h reporting mechanism for new tests. posix_timers.c >> is updated to use it and it would make sense use it for new tests as >> well. > > Hrm.. I'm not objecting to this, but one thing I've tried to do with > my test suite is minimize any sort of test-infrastructure > dependencies, so as much as possible, single test files can be plucked > out, built and run by themselves. Not sure if this concern is > something I'm just crazy about or if others see value in this as well. > :) Ah I see see your point. Dependency on a framework would take away the flexibility. > > The kselftest.h calls are simple enough, so I'll try to integrate the > changes in and see if there's a nice way to keep the test files > functioning externally too. See you if you can, if it does become hard, I an not going to make it a requirement to use it. :) -- Shuah -- Shuah Khan Sr. Linux Kernel Developer Open Source Innovation Group Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley) shuahkh@osg.samsung.com | (970) 217-8978