Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] rbtree: performance and correctness test

[Michel Lespinasse]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 17:31:50 -0700 Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>  Makefile            |    2 +-
>>  lib/Kconfig.debug   |    1 +
>>  tests/Kconfig       |   18 +++++++
>>  tests/Makefile      |    1 +
>>  tests/rbtree_test.c |  135 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> This patch does a new thing: adds a kernel self-test module into
> lib/tests/ and sets up the infrastructure to add new kernel self-test
> modules in that directory.
>
> I don't see a problem with this per-se, but it is a new thing which we
> should think about.
>
> In previous such cases (eg, kernel/rcutorture.c) we put those modules
> into the same directory as the code which is being tested.  So to
> follow that pattern, this new code would have gone into lib/.
>
> If we adopt your new proposal then we should perhaps also move tests
> such as rcutorture over into tests/.  And that makes one wonder whether
> we should have a standalone directory for kernel selftest modules.  eg
> tests/self-test-nmodules/.

Ah, I did not realize we had a precedent for in-tree kernel test modules.

I don't think my proposal was significantly better than this
precedent, so I'll just adjust my patch to conform to it:
- move rbtree_test.c to lib/
- modify just lib/Makefile and lib/Kconfig.debug to get the module built.

Will send a replacement patch for this (so you can drop that one patch
from the stack and replace it with)

Thanks,

-- 
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/