Re: [GIT PULL?] Create and populate toplevel tests/ for kernel tests
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 03:57:13PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Ananth, > > On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:12:31 +0530 Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The patchset in question is just a major code movement - basically to > > move all in-kernel tests to live under a toplevel tests/ directory. As > > such, all the stakeholders have acked the patchset, but it does look > > like this is a big enough change to be deferred to the next merge > > window. > > > > Given that there is general agreement about the patchset, could you > > please pull in the changes into the linux-next tree? > > > > Sam has setup a git tree for this and you can pull from: > > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git > > > > Link to the thread: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/11/97 > > I will include this in the next linux-tree. It looks like it should not > cause to many problems (it merges OK on top of the about to be announce > next-20080222), but if I get a hard to resolve merge problem with it, I > will drop it first, OK. > > I have noted you as the contact. Sure! Thanks Stephen. Ananth -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [GIT PULL?] Create and populate toplevel tests/ for kernel tests
Hi Ananth, On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:12:31 +0530 Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The patchset in question is just a major code movement - basically to > move all in-kernel tests to live under a toplevel tests/ directory. As > such, all the stakeholders have acked the patchset, but it does look > like this is a big enough change to be deferred to the next merge > window. > > Given that there is general agreement about the patchset, could you > please pull in the changes into the linux-next tree? > > Sam has setup a git tree for this and you can pull from: > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git > > Link to the thread: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/11/97 I will include this in the next linux-tree. It looks like it should not cause to many problems (it merges OK on top of the about to be announce next-20080222), but if I get a hard to resolve merge problem with it, I will drop it first, OK. I have noted you as the contact. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell[EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpob0Y0UsVFR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [GIT PULL?] Create and populate toplevel tests/ for kernel tests
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 08:21:53PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Hi Anath.
>
> Linus did not pull this in the -rc1 to -rc2 timeframe
> so please resubmit the patch serie one week into the
> next merge window (when most of the trees has hit linus' tree
> and Andrew has made his first merge).
>
> IF you need an extra eye balling then you can submit
> a few weeks before the merge window opens.
> Thats typical after an -rc with only a few patches.
Stephen,
The patchset in question is just a major code movement - basically to
move all in-kernel tests to live under a toplevel tests/ directory. As
such, all the stakeholders have acked the patchset, but it does look
like this is a big enough change to be deferred to the next merge
window.
Given that there is general agreement about the patchset, could you
please pull in the changes into the linux-next tree?
Sam has setup a git tree for this and you can pull from:
ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git
Link to the thread: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/11/97
Thanks,
Ananth
> Thanks,
> Sam
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 11:39:18PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > Hi Linus.
> >
> > Will you consider such a primary code-movement for -rc1
> > or shall we wait until next merge window?
> >
> > Had we hit -rc2 I would not have sent this pull req and
> > feel free to flame me anyway.
> >
> > The rationale to get it merged is obviously to avoid
> > merge conflicts and the only reason I ask is that I consider
> > it a low risk patch.
> >
> > I have not included 8/8 since it was questioned and it
> > will wait until next merge window. But the first 7 was
> > straightforward.
> >
> > You can pull from:
> > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git
> >
> > diffstat and shortlog below.
> > I also included mail last with a few of the merge related comments.
> >
> > Sam
> >
> > Makefile|1 +
> > drivers/misc/Makefile |1 -
> > kernel/Makefile |4 -
> > lib/Kconfig.debug | 71
> > +
> > lib/Makefile|1 -
> > tests/Kconfig | 79
> > +++
> > tests/Makefile | 10 +++
> > {kernel => tests}/backtracetest.c |0
> > {drivers/misc => tests}/lkdtm.c | 12 ++--
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-hardirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-mutex.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-hardirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-softirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rsem.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-softirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-hardirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-softirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-hardirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-softirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wsem.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest.c |0
> > {kernel => tests}/rcutorture.c |0
> > {kernel => tests}/rtmutex-tester.c |2 +-
> > {kernel => tests}/test_kprobes.c|0
> > 27 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
> >
> > Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli (7):
> > Create tests/ directory
> > Move locking selftests to tests/
> > Move rcutorture to tests/
> > Move rtmutex-tests to tests/
> > Move lkdtm to tests/
> > Move kprobes smoke tests to tests/
> > Move backtrace tests to tests/
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:22:46PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:44:52 -0500
> > > Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 04:14:52PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > The following series of patches create and populate the toplevel
> > > > > tests/
> > > > > directory. This will henceforth be the place where all in-kernel tests
> > > > > live.
> > > > >
> > > > > All patches against 2.6.25-rc1 and are just code movement without any
> > > > > change in functionality.
> > > >
> > > > ACK to patches 1-7, and I agree with Ingo that the x86-specific test
> > > > should stay under arch/x86.
> > >
> > > OK. But now is basically the worst time for me (or anyone else) to merge
> > > large code-motion changes like this, because they need to be carried for
> > > two months or more.
> > >
> > > And even though git can track renames, putting them into a git tree (say,
> > > git-kbuild) won't help, b
Re: [GIT PULL?] Create and populate toplevel tests/ for kernel tests
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 08:21:53PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Hi Anath.
Hi Sam,
> Linus did not pull this in the -rc1 to -rc2 timeframe
> so please resubmit the patch serie one week into the
> next merge window (when most of the trees has hit linus' tree
> and Andrew has made his first merge).
Isn't this set a good candidate for linux-next? If so, we could request
Stephen to pull in the patchset.
Ananth
> IF you need an extra eye balling then you can submit
> a few weeks before the merge window opens.
> Thats typical after an -rc with only a few patches.
>
> Thanks,
> Sam
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 11:39:18PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > Hi Linus.
> >
> > Will you consider such a primary code-movement for -rc1
> > or shall we wait until next merge window?
> >
> > Had we hit -rc2 I would not have sent this pull req and
> > feel free to flame me anyway.
> >
> > The rationale to get it merged is obviously to avoid
> > merge conflicts and the only reason I ask is that I consider
> > it a low risk patch.
> >
> > I have not included 8/8 since it was questioned and it
> > will wait until next merge window. But the first 7 was
> > straightforward.
> >
> > You can pull from:
> > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git
> >
> > diffstat and shortlog below.
> > I also included mail last with a few of the merge related comments.
> >
> > Sam
> >
> > Makefile|1 +
> > drivers/misc/Makefile |1 -
> > kernel/Makefile |4 -
> > lib/Kconfig.debug | 71
> > +
> > lib/Makefile|1 -
> > tests/Kconfig | 79
> > +++
> > tests/Makefile | 10 +++
> > {kernel => tests}/backtracetest.c |0
> > {drivers/misc => tests}/lkdtm.c | 12 ++--
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-hardirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-mutex.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-hardirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-softirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rsem.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-softirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-hardirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-softirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-hardirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-softirq.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wsem.h |0
> > {lib => tests}/locking-selftest.c |0
> > {kernel => tests}/rcutorture.c |0
> > {kernel => tests}/rtmutex-tester.c |2 +-
> > {kernel => tests}/test_kprobes.c|0
> > 27 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
> >
> > Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli (7):
> > Create tests/ directory
> > Move locking selftests to tests/
> > Move rcutorture to tests/
> > Move rtmutex-tests to tests/
> > Move lkdtm to tests/
> > Move kprobes smoke tests to tests/
> > Move backtrace tests to tests/
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:22:46PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:44:52 -0500
> > > Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 04:14:52PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > The following series of patches create and populate the toplevel
> > > > > tests/
> > > > > directory. This will henceforth be the place where all in-kernel tests
> > > > > live.
> > > > >
> > > > > All patches against 2.6.25-rc1 and are just code movement without any
> > > > > change in functionality.
> > > >
> > > > ACK to patches 1-7, and I agree with Ingo that the x86-specific test
> > > > should stay under arch/x86.
> > >
> > > OK. But now is basically the worst time for me (or anyone else) to merge
> > > large code-motion changes like this, because they need to be carried for
> > > two months or more.
> > >
> > > And even though git can track renames, putting them into a git tree (say,
> > > git-kbuild) won't help, because if some other git tree tries to modify a
> > > file in its original place, I get to fix up the fallout.
> > >
> > > Which I _could_ do, and would do if the patches were particularly risky or
> > > added/changed functionality or whatever. But they don't do that, and
> > > there
> > > is little advantage in maintaining them for the >2 months.
> > >
> > > So. Please redo and resend the patches when we hit 2.6.25-rc6 or so?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > (linux-next will la
Re: [GIT PULL?] Create and populate toplevel tests/ for kernel tests
Hi Anath.
Linus did not pull this in the -rc1 to -rc2 timeframe
so please resubmit the patch serie one week into the
next merge window (when most of the trees has hit linus' tree
and Andrew has made his first merge).
IF you need an extra eye balling then you can submit
a few weeks before the merge window opens.
Thats typical after an -rc with only a few patches.
Thanks,
Sam
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 11:39:18PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Hi Linus.
>
> Will you consider such a primary code-movement for -rc1
> or shall we wait until next merge window?
>
> Had we hit -rc2 I would not have sent this pull req and
> feel free to flame me anyway.
>
> The rationale to get it merged is obviously to avoid
> merge conflicts and the only reason I ask is that I consider
> it a low risk patch.
>
> I have not included 8/8 since it was questioned and it
> will wait until next merge window. But the first 7 was
> straightforward.
>
> You can pull from:
> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git
>
> diffstat and shortlog below.
> I also included mail last with a few of the merge related comments.
>
> Sam
>
> Makefile|1 +
> drivers/misc/Makefile |1 -
> kernel/Makefile |4 -
> lib/Kconfig.debug | 71 +
> lib/Makefile|1 -
> tests/Kconfig | 79
> +++
> tests/Makefile | 10 +++
> {kernel => tests}/backtracetest.c |0
> {drivers/misc => tests}/lkdtm.c | 12 ++--
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-hardirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-mutex.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-hardirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-softirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rsem.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-softirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-hardirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-softirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-hardirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-softirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wsem.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest.c |0
> {kernel => tests}/rcutorture.c |0
> {kernel => tests}/rtmutex-tester.c |2 +-
> {kernel => tests}/test_kprobes.c|0
> 27 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
>
> Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli (7):
> Create tests/ directory
> Move locking selftests to tests/
> Move rcutorture to tests/
> Move rtmutex-tests to tests/
> Move lkdtm to tests/
> Move kprobes smoke tests to tests/
> Move backtrace tests to tests/
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:22:46PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:44:52 -0500
> > Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 04:14:52PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
> > > wrote:
> > > > The following series of patches create and populate the toplevel tests/
> > > > directory. This will henceforth be the place where all in-kernel tests
> > > > live.
> > > >
> > > > All patches against 2.6.25-rc1 and are just code movement without any
> > > > change in functionality.
> > >
> > > ACK to patches 1-7, and I agree with Ingo that the x86-specific test
> > > should stay under arch/x86.
> >
> > OK. But now is basically the worst time for me (or anyone else) to merge
> > large code-motion changes like this, because they need to be carried for
> > two months or more.
> >
> > And even though git can track renames, putting them into a git tree (say,
> > git-kbuild) won't help, because if some other git tree tries to modify a
> > file in its original place, I get to fix up the fallout.
> >
> > Which I _could_ do, and would do if the patches were particularly risky or
> > added/changed functionality or whatever. But they don't do that, and there
> > is little advantage in maintaining them for the >2 months.
> >
> > So. Please redo and resend the patches when we hit 2.6.25-rc6 or so?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > (linux-next will largely fix all this: git will take care of the renames
> > and I'll just base the -mm queue on the consolidated linux-next. But we
> > aren't there yet).
> >
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe fr
Re: [GIT PULL?] Create and populate toplevel tests/ for kernel tests
* Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> {kernel => tests}/backtracetest.c |0
> {drivers/misc => tests}/lkdtm.c | 12 ++--
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-hardirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-mutex.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-hardirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock-softirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rlock.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-rsem.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-softirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-hardirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin-softirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-spin.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-hardirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock-softirq.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wlock.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest-wsem.h |0
> {lib => tests}/locking-selftest.c |0
> {kernel => tests}/rcutorture.c |0
> {kernel => tests}/rtmutex-tester.c |2 +-
> {kernel => tests}/test_kprobes.c|0
> 27 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [GIT PULL?] Create and populate toplevel tests/ for kernel tests
Sam Ravnborg wrote: Hi Linus. Will you consider such a primary code-movement for -rc1 or shall we wait until next merge window? Had we hit -rc2 I would not have sent this pull req and feel free to flame me anyway. The rationale to get it merged is obviously to avoid merge conflicts and the only reason I ask is that I consider it a low risk patch. I have not included 8/8 since it was questioned and it will wait until next merge window. But the first 7 was straightforward. You can pull from: ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/tests.git diffstat and shortlog below. I also included mail last with a few of the merge related comments. Sam Makefile|1 + drivers/misc/Makefile |1 - kernel/Makefile |4 - lib/Kconfig.debug | 71 + lib/Makefile|1 - tests/Kconfig | 79 +++ we could make it even lower risk and not move the Kconfig now. Moving the Kconfig is fine for .26; it doesn't really impact anything else -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
