Messages in this thread | | | From | Mike Frysinger <> | Date | Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:11:42 -0400 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 05/17] Blackfin: convert to generic checksum code |
| |
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 18:06, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 23 June 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> and this is an internal tester ... if we're going to let arches >> override it, then its function signature are pretty much set in stone. >> i agree we should test every checksum function, but i think only >> testing do_csum indirectly would be detrimental to the people who >> would want to use this -- arch maintainers looking to implement >> do_csum() themselves. otherwise they need to step through the >> surrounding functions a bit to find the exact values given to >> do_csum() and the exact value expected back such that the calling >> function still works. and every arch guy is going to do this same >> thing. > > It depends on how we want to use it. If it's only for testing architecture > that have moved to the generic checksum code, that's fine. I was > thinking we could also use it for architectures that want to keep > their own code, but we don't have to.
ah, i see what you're going for. how about we make testing of do_csum() dependent upon GENERIC_CSUM. that way we can satisfy everyone.
any other suggestions for coming up with test vectors ? or i just extract a few more examples from flooding my board and call it a day. if someone complains a bug existed and current test vectors didnt cover it, then they should submit a new one. -mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |