Re: [PATCH v2] selftests/cgroup: memory controller self-tests
From: Roman Gushchin
Date: Fri May 11 2018 - 14:04:30 EST
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.
> -- 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.