On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 4:51 PM Filipe Cavalcanti wrote: > Hi there! > I think having tests under `testing/` is good if it mirrors the directory > structure of the OS. > `testing/sched/clock`: sched/clock specific tests > `testing/mm/iob`: mm/IOB specific tests > `testing/sched/signal`: signal tests > Seems the PR you mentioned goes towards this idea, but I understand some > tests do not exactly fit into the structure as we want. > For those cases, I'm sure some structure could be developed.
Yes I also proposed that but not all cases seem to fit and the PR author proposes more feature focused nomenclature in that case which is okay I think? :-) > Regarding item 2, I don't see why we would need to put `cmocka` on the path. > In the PR you showed (2935), `test_<feature>.c` looks clean. Yes, the question is how should we name the directory where those tests are located? basic? basic_tests? generic? generic_tests? standard? standard_tests? cmocka? Any hints welcome :-) Thanks Filipe :-) -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
