On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 10:42:50AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> Probably, one might be able to revert the logic: instead of running each
> test for each size, run each size for each test: then, the tests are fixed
> and would be covering all available sizes in a single logical test.
Yeah, th
On 21.05.25 20:48, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 03:28:47PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 16.05.25 20:07, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 04:12:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
[Converting to kselftet_harness]
That'd certainly work, though doing that is more s
On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 03:28:47PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 16.05.25 20:07, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 04:12:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > [Converting to kselftet_harness]
> > > > That'd certainly work, though doing that is more surgery on the test
> > > >
On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 03:28:47PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 16.05.25 20:07, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 04:12:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > [Converting to kselftet_harness]
> > > > That'd certainly work, though doing that is more surgery on the test
> > > >
On 16.05.25 20:07, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 04:12:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 16.05.25 15:09, Mark Brown wrote:
I'm afraid we have other such tests that report duplicate conditions. cow.c
is likely another candidate (written by me ;) ).
That one's not come up f
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 04:12:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 16.05.25 15:09, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > I'm afraid we have other such tests that report duplicate conditions.
> > > cow.c
> > > is likely another candidate (written by me ;) ).
> > That one's not come up for me (this was one
On 16.05.25 15:09, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 02:55:24PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 16.05.25 14:29, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 10:02:16AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
reason), what exactly is the problem with that?
We run tests. If all pass, we're
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 02:55:24PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 16.05.25 14:29, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 10:02:16AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > reason), what exactly is the problem with that?
> > > We run tests. If all pass, we're happy, if one fails, we inv
On 16.05.25 14:29, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 10:02:16AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 15.05.25 10:57, Mark Brown wrote:
The kselftest framework uses the string logged when a test result is
reported as the unique identifier for a test, using it to track test
results betwee
On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 10:02:16AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 15.05.25 10:57, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The kselftest framework uses the string logged when a test result is
> > reported as the unique identifier for a test, using it to track test
> > results between runs. The gup_longterm tes
On 15.05.25 10:57, Mark Brown wrote:
The kselftest framework uses the string logged when a test result is
reported as the unique identifier for a test, using it to track test
results between runs. The gup_longterm test completely fails to follow
this pattern, it runs a single test function repeat
On 15/05/25 3:11 pm, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 03:05:07PM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
On 15/05/25 2:27 pm, Mark Brown wrote:
@@ -189,7 +214,10 @@ static void do_test(int fd, size_t size, enum test_type
type, bool shared)
* some previously unsupported filesystem
On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 03:05:07PM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
> On 15/05/25 2:27 pm, Mark Brown wrote:
> > @@ -189,7 +214,10 @@ static void do_test(int fd, size_t size, enum
> > test_type type, bool shared)
> > * some previously unsupported filesystems, we might want to
> >
On 15/05/25 2:27 pm, Mark Brown wrote:
The kselftest framework uses the string logged when a test result is
reported as the unique identifier for a test, using it to track test
results between runs. The gup_longterm test completely fails to follow
this pattern, it runs a single test function r
14 matches
Mail list logo
