11 Jun
2025
11 Jun
'25
10:21 a.m.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 10:52:02PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
On 2025-06-10 18:21:27+0100, Mark Brown wrote:
Given that AFAICT the tests don't use any kselftest infrastructure or otherwise overlap with it I think it'd be better to move them to tools/testing/nolibc, that'd make it clearer that they're their own thing and avoid surprises.
Also makes sense. However I plan to make the tests compatible with kselftests as one of the next steps. The custom logic will stay, but for increased test coverage the tests should also work as regular selftests.
Ah, great - if it's going to be integrated into the kselftest runtime system then that'd help a lot.