On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Linda Knippers <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 03/30/2017 01:12 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Linda Knippers <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/30/2017 12:56 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>> [..]
>>>> Patches welcome :).
>>>
>>>
>>> You won't like my patch for that because I agree with Jeff. :-)
>>>
>>> Right now I'm more interested in seeing if I can modify the tests to not
>>> require nfit_test.  I've only looked at btt-check.sh but so far, it doesn't
>>> look that hard.
>>
>> The point of nfit_test is that you can run them with worrying about
>> risks to real data. So I don't want to see patches moving existing
>> nfit_test tests to something else.
>
> I'd like to test on an unmodified kernel using real hardware with a real nfit.
> As long as it's clear that the test needs a scratch device, why is that bad?
>
> Maybe other tests are more difficult but the btt-check test looks pretty
> straightforward.

Sure, but I don't see a need to carry that in upstream ndctl. The goal
with nfit_test is to be able to do unit check out of the libnvdimm
sub-system without any platform dependencies.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Reply via email to