On Sun, 2016-07-10 at 12:00 +0900, James Bottomley wrote:
> 
> Note: I'm not saying don't do testing, or even that testing isn't a
> suitable discussion topic for KS.  What I am saying is that I think we
> should discuss our stable practices separately from testing.

Well... there is a danger that by divorcing the discussion of the
problem, from any discussion of specific things we might do to fix it,
we could transform the former into little more than a navel-gazing
session.

Testing seems like the most productive way to reduce the number of
regressions we see.

We really should have more of an expectation that new code should be
submitted *with* test cases. After all, it's not like people are
generally submitting code that's *entirely* untested. It's more that
testing is ad-hoc, and sometimes depends on running on specific
hardware. But even the latter can often be fixed, with appropriate test
harnesses.

Even actual device drivers could sometimes be exercised with tools
based on MMIO tracing and playback.

-- 
David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@intel.com                              Intel Corporation