From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751584AbeEKTdm (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 May 2018 15:33:42 -0400 Received: from mailout.easymail.ca ([64.68.200.34]:42787 "EHLO mailout.easymail.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751373AbeEKTdl (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 May 2018 15:33:41 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests/cgroup: memory controller self-tests To: Roman Gushchin Cc: Tejun Heo , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Mike Rapoport , kernel-team@fb.com, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan References: <20180510163701.28936-1-guro@fb.com> <20180510183224.GP2368884@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20180511143228.GU2368884@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20180511162920.GV2368884@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <957d089f-7a88-9ff4-733a-8e082339720c@kernel.org> <20180511180342.GA20683@castle> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 13:33:26 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180511180342.GA20683@castle> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/11/2018 12:03 PM, Roman Gushchin wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:58:53AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 05/11/2018 10:29 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: >>> Hello, Shuah. >>> >>> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 08:55:28AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >>>> I think we don't need to create a special branch and all. The following >>>> should work: >>>> >>>> linux-next already has the skip work. What we can do is: >>>> >>>> Do the cleanup and test it against linux-next. In linux-next SKIP isn't PASS. If test is >>>> compiled on linux-next, you will see that SKIP is SKIP. If it is compiled on the mainline, >>>> it will be reported PASS, which will be a temporary state. >>> >>> Hah, why not just create a branch and make sure what we see in the >>> topic branch is what we'll push? That's how these things are done >>> usually. >>> >> >> It probably doesn't need to be complex. >> >> Unless there is a dependency with the cgroup tree and the cgroup test, >> the test can go through kselftest tree with you. That is usually how >> I handle kselftests. >> >> If you think there is a dependency and it has to go through cgroup tree >> then, I can give you the Ack once this TEST_* gets cleaned up. >> >> thanks, >> -- Shuah >> > > > Hello, Shuah! > > A minor problem here is a version with KSFT_ constants won't even compile > without your patch, which redefines KSFT_SKIP into a separate value, > due to duplicate cases in the switch statement at the end of the file. > > Anyway, not a big deal, we can handle it either way. > An updated version below. > > Thanks! > Yeah. I see that. You have a switch for the KSFT_ values. Since there is no dependency on the cgroup tree, I would recommend having this patch go through kselftest tree which is the normal process for tests anyway. This version is good and I can apply this to linux-kselftest next. I ran a quick test and the Skip case looks good. TAP version 13 selftests: cgroup: test_memcontrol ======================================== 1..0 # Skipped: memory controller isn't available not ok 1..1 selftests: cgroup: test_memcontrol [SKIP] Tejun! Please send me your Ack. thanks, -- Shuah