From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8E31C4361B for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 10:40:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D75723357 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 10:40:47 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3D75723357 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 159EC6B0068; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 05:40:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 108FD6B006C; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 05:40:47 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id EEC096B0070; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 05:40:46 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0207.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.207]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D569E6B0068 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 05:40:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin14.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF178249980 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 10:40:46 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77598802092.14.crib56_1102ad12742b Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin14.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B83E18229818 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 10:40:46 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: crib56_1102ad12742b X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3104 Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by imf42.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 10:40:45 +0000 (UTC) IronPort-SDR: Yd16r8dqOyl+FOhJ3nPkZYVoUuuFoUe0ScxopGUZb8bBfOgo0UTZ0vlX+tml2JkRV43aQvlUgs 1Fiujv2/lGOQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9836"; a="174270347" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,424,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="174270347" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 02:40:43 -0800 IronPort-SDR: HCj74Sc9DSc8oSLED6DSYpCg+xXP3Ip0x3YLNIg/qPrEORcV5TEwJ/TiF7yFXW4UF7GW8cqyWj uKhSfnc/aPjg== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,424,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="337444957" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com (HELO smile) ([10.237.68.40]) by orsmga003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 02:40:41 -0800 Received: from andy by smile with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1kpUFa-00EjX5-Vv; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:41:42 +0200 Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:41:42 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: David Gow Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Shuah Khan , Brendan Higgins , Mark Brown , Linux-MM , "Vaittinen, Matti" , mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, Vitor Massaru Iha Subject: Re: [patch 18/95] lib/list_kunit: follow new file name convention for KUnit tests Message-ID: <20201216104142.GY4077@smile.fi.intel.com> References: <20201215204156.f05ec694b907845bcfab5c44@linux-foundation.org> <20201216044316.LYocMD9yH%akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 02:53:10PM +0800, David Gow wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:02 PM Linus Torvalds > wrote: ... > > Don't send me any more rename patches until your tools can actually do renames. > My other thought is that this sort of patchset really makes more sense > to push through the kselftest/kunit branch anyway, as all of the > changes were really more KUnit related than anything else. Does it > make sense to re-submit this that way? I think it makes sense because this is driven by rules set up by kselftest/kunit. My main concern here is to have cmdline_kunit in the tree (it is a new file). Renaming is up to you, I just wanted to be consistent with names and KUnit documentation. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko