From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Gabriele Paoloni <gpaoloni@redhat.com>
Cc: shuah@kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
safety-architecture@lists.elisa.tech, acarmina@redhat.com,
kstewart@linuxfoundation.org, chuckwolber@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add testable code specifications
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 09:35:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2025102111-facility-dismay-322e@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250910170000.6475-1-gpaoloni@redhat.com>
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 06:59:57PM +0200, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
> [1] was an initial proposal defining testable code specifications for
> some functions in /drivers/char/mem.c.
> However a Guideline to write such specifications was missing and test
> cases tracing to such specifications were missing.
> This patchset represents a next step and is organised as follows:
> - patch 1/3 contains the Guideline for writing code specifications
> - patch 2/3 contains examples of code specfications defined for some
> functions of drivers/char/mem.c
> - patch 3/3 contains examples of selftests that map to some code
> specifications of patch 2/3
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250821170419.70668-1-gpaoloni@redhat.com/
"RFC" implies there is a request. I don't see that here, am I missing
that? Or is this "good to go" and want us to seriously consider
accepting this?
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-21 7:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-10 16:59 Gabriele Paoloni
2025-09-10 16:59 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 1/3] Documentation: add guidelines for writing " Gabriele Paoloni
2025-09-15 22:33 ` Jonathan Corbet
2025-09-17 15:24 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2025-10-20 19:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-20 20:54 ` Chuck Wolber
2025-10-20 21:02 ` Chuck Wolber
2025-10-21 15:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-21 16:27 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2025-10-21 16:34 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-21 16:43 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2025-09-10 16:59 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 2/3] /dev/mem: Add initial documentation of memory_open() and mem_fops Gabriele Paoloni
2025-09-15 22:39 ` Jonathan Corbet
2025-09-16 7:29 ` Chuck Wolber
2025-09-17 15:38 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2025-09-10 17:00 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 3/3] selftests/devmem: initial testset Gabriele Paoloni
2025-10-21 7:35 ` Greg KH
2025-10-21 17:40 ` Alessandro Carminati
2025-10-21 7:35 ` Greg KH [this message]
2025-10-21 9:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add testable code specifications Gabriele Paoloni
2025-10-21 16:46 ` Greg KH
2025-10-22 14:06 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2025-10-22 17:13 ` Greg KH
2025-11-07 16:29 ` Chuck Wolber
2025-11-26 13:55 ` Greg KH
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2025102111-facility-dismay-322e@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=acarmina@redhat.com \
--cc=chuckwolber@gmail.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=gpaoloni@redhat.com \
--cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=safety-architecture@lists.elisa.tech \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox