Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] kunit: Fix formatting of KUNIT tests to meet the standard

On 4/18/21 3:39 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 04:58:03AM -0400, Nico Pache wrote:

quoted

There are few instances of KUNIT tests that are not properly defined.
This commit focuses on correcting these issues to match the standard
defined in the Documentation.

The word "standard" seems to be over-stating things.  The
documentation currently states, "they _usually_ have config options
ending in ``_KUNIT_TEST'' (emphasis mine).  I can imagine that there
might be some useful things we can do from a tooling perspective if we
do standardize things, but if you really want to make it a "standard",
we should first update the manpage to say so, 

KUNIT Maintainers, should we go ahead and make this the "standard"?

As Ted has stated...  consistency with 'grep' is my desired outcome.

and explain why (e.g.,
so that we can easily extract out all of the kunit test modules, and
perhaps paint a vision of what tools might be able to do with such a
standard).

Alternatively, the word "standard" could perhaps be changed to
"convention", which I think more accurately defines how things work at
the moment.Nico Pache (6):
  kunit: ASoC: topology: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
  kunit: software node: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
  kunit: ext4: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
  kunit: lib: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
  kunit: mptcp: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
  m68k: update configs to match the proper KUNIT syntax

Also, "adhear" is not the correct spelling; the correct spelling is
"adhere" (from the Latin verb "adhaerere", "to stick", as in "to hold
fast or stick by as if by gluing", which then became "to bind oneself
to the observance of a set of rules or standards or practices").

       		       	      	       		 - Ted

Whoops... Made that mistake in my v1 and inadvertently copied it over

to all the patches.


Cheers!

-- Nico