Re: [PATCH] software node: introduce CONFIG_KUNIT_DRIVER_PE_TEST

[Randy Dunlap]

On 1/14/20 8:42 AM, Alan Maguire wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> 
>> Hi Alan,
>>
>> On 1/14/20 8:09 AM, Alan Maguire wrote:
>>> currently the property entry kunit tests are built if CONFIG_KUNIT=y.
>>> This will cause warnings when merged with the kunit tree that now
>>> supports tristate CONFIG_KUNIT.  While the tests appear to compile
>>> as a module, we get a warning about missing module license.
>>>
>>> It's better to have a per-test suite CONFIG variable so that
>>> we can do selective building of kunit-based suites, and can
>>> also avoid merge issues like this.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
> 
> Apologies for missing you out here.
>  
>>> Fixes: c032ace71c29 ("software node: add basic tests for property entries")
>>> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/base/test/Kconfig  | 3 +++
>>>  drivers/base/test/Makefile | 2 +-
>>>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/test/Kconfig b/drivers/base/test/Kconfig
>>> index 86e85da..d29ae95 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/base/test/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/base/test/Kconfig
>>> @@ -8,3 +8,6 @@ config TEST_ASYNC_DRIVER_PROBE
>>>  	  The module name will be test_async_driver_probe.ko
>>>  
>>>  	  If unsure say N.
>>> +config KUNIT_DRIVER_PE_TEST
>>> +	bool "KUnit Tests for property entry API"
>>> +	depends on KUNIT
>>
>> Why is this bool instead of tristate?
>>
> 
> The support for building kunit and kunit tests as modules has not merged 
> into linux-next yet, so if we set the option to tristate the build would
> fail for allmodconfig builds.   Once it's merged we can revisit though; I 
> should have mentioned this, thanks for reminding me!

Oh. I see.  Thanks.

-- 
~Randy