From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3B04126F16; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:15:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712074532; cv=none; b=Qz2EKwWzEYofbAF3Ritnw7KIVPbabt3MURtI2yGzqipvogJ6FPrzyWl1pB3ylnBMrIQIJllTEDxOE63K7ukZow+G1YWQPDobD2+j9iiLaPRjgkgHbqYrJi1dYAYaJAkLDib3Um0TOahHECHIdkXZG1t2kFobMc1O5NqNrGmPCBQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712074532; c=relaxed/simple; bh=puCtEw4oHch3bsW7tk3MvxKQa3Jdz7HabGwvzPek10k=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jzdVMciM2nt6fHSjO8Xjx0ceCxRZT/L2MSqefqDPIeT9yEiROj35wVUJp81b3dGq0HEnvmto1cXn84SfYEk+xP36TDE+HmSWSrxZzngn0b0pRPUQEgiA16JNedpje2hkLimtkl1XvUmevPp/i1dzo4h+epvmyKcbSGjiedgG29U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=cTecepGj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="cTecepGj" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net E18CF45E3E DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1712074530; bh=puCtEw4oHch3bsW7tk3MvxKQa3Jdz7HabGwvzPek10k=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=cTecepGjgvmHEhlIL99lLAqS+O2mxlhIvCeQVJcy3OYoQrrjB6GEIT4htdW16Yke+ xNmDUvcGdhUCUnM4RT4C2aPp37roR0JyL3wVY/JXRAy2vV17sbA52gMsmz6IIFoxfK pgjcHpLSlzBCmDBoN+a6z57OujkQy+8v3eroCfbRdcBtas0T66wBxWXroVkee7VJ7P JNirAE3Jsg7gZL3fRDqfsyGyAKxI1RgZcfkjxqM5QZepggIgpgOjXz+emHZQp5enNF h0G3UrOng3zeJYsab+AlhZq1NqgmznNLf8P+YLvAyxPHRiQKt9kTBniUQrtqqjW3UY tTQPCujZz+HbQ== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:5e00:625::646]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E18CF45E3E; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:15:29 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: David Gow , Kemeng Shi Cc: brendan.higgins@linux.dev, rmoar@google.com, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: kunit: correct KUNIT_VERY_SLOW to KUNIT_SPEED_VERY_SLOW In-Reply-To: References: <20240320171424.6536-1-shikemeng@huaweicloud.com> Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 10:15:29 -0600 Message-ID: <87il0zvizi.fsf@meer.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain David Gow writes: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 16:18, Kemeng Shi wrote: >> >> There is no KUNIT_VERY_SLOW, I guess we mean KUNIT_SPEED_VERY_SLOW. >> >> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi >> --- > > Nice catch, thanks! > > Reviewed-by: David Gow Let me know if you'd like me to pick this up; otherwise I'm assuming it will go via the kunit path. Thanks, jon