From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C398BA1 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2015 22:50:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ED1F155 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2015 22:50:13 +0000 (UTC) From: Peter =?iso-8859-1?q?H=FCwe?= To: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 00:51:41 +0200 References: <20150707092434.GE11162@sirena.org.uk> <20150707171819.GF11162@sirena.org.uk> <559C11C4.80301@roeck-us.net> In-Reply-To: <559C11C4.80301@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201507080051.42985.PeterHuewe@gmx.de> Cc: Shuah Khan , Kevin Hilman , grant@secretlab.ca, Tyler Baker , Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Testing List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, I definitely think discussing the next steps in terms of automated regression testing is important - so thanks for raising this issue!! > >> Maybe list all known ones as a start ? > > > > Off the top of my head the automated ones I'm aware of are Olof's build > > & boot test, Dan running smatch and I think some other static analysis > > stuff, someone (not sure who?) running some coccinelle stuff, Coverity > > and I've got a builder too. For the TPM subsystem I have several things in place: - applying patches automatically triggers a build on travis-ci.org -- it triggers some basic style checkers -- the build runs a qemu (with the tpm simulator) running another qemu (which now sees a real /dev/tpm0) with the new kernel. --- the qemu-qemu-linux runs my tpm driver testsuite. The reason behind this is that I can hook up besides the TPM1.2 simulator also the binary only windows based TPM2.0 simulator (with wine) without modifying qemu source -- but still the qemu-qemu-kernel sees 'real' hardware. - some scripts for deploying new kernels to real hw machines and running tests with real hw tpms - a mocked i2c tpm which I can hook up via the I2C_Slave interface, which also passes my driver testsuite -- so I can test the drivers within UML :) - and of course wolfram's ninja-check scripts for style checkers > Plus mine, of course. Only part missing is automated bisect and e-mail > if something starts failing. Yeah - getting the reports reasonably fast is probably the most important stuff -- the 0day testing really does a great job here. Thanks, Peter