Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] stable issues

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 02:33:55PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2014/05/09 13:11), Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 01:35:45PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:41 AM, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> >>> On Thu 08-05-14 11:38:14, Li Zefan wrote:
> >>>> On 2014/5/7 22:15, Jan Kara wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed 07-05-14 12:06:28, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 07:58:58PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >>>>>>> I tend to think of LTP as a nice way of doing unit-tests for the uapi.
> >>>>>>> Fengguang's scripts do include it, iirc, but I'm referring more to unit
> >>>>>>> level tests. It serves well for changes in ipc, and should also for
> >>>>>>> other subsystems.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> LTP is too complicated and enterprisey.  With trinity you don't can just
> >>>>>> type:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>    ./configure.sh && make && ./trinity
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> With LTP you have to read the install documents.  You can't run it
> >>>>>> from your home directory so you have to build a virtual machine which
> >>>>>> you don't care about before you install it.
> >>>>>   Actually, I'm occasionally using LTP and it doesn't seem too bad to me.
> >>>>> And it seems LTP is improving over time so I'm mostly happy about it.
> >>>>
> >>>> But how useful LTP is in finding kernel bugs? It seems to me we seldom
> >>>> see bug reports which say the bug was found by LTP?
> >>>   I'm handling a few (3-5) per year. I'm also extending the coverage (e.g.
> >>> recently I've added fanotify interface coverage) when doing more involved
> >>> changes to some code so that LTP can be reasonably used for regression
> >>> checking.
> >>
> >> There was some talk about having some kind of 'make test' that you can
> >> type in a kernel tree.  I'm not sure what the plan is, if any.
> > 
> > The plan is to fix it, we already have it in the tree today, but it is
> > broken.
> 
> So will the "make test" run tools/testing/selftest? or other tests?

To start with, it runs the tests we have in the kernel today.  Expanding
that to fix those tests is a good start, and we can go from there.

thanks,

greg k-h