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 E3932B4C for ; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:40:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from osg.samsung.com (ec2-52-27-115-49.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [52.27.115.49]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E6341AE for ; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:40:48 +0000 (UTC) To: Steven Rostedt References: <576cea07-770a-4864-c3f5-0832ff211e94@leemhuis.info> <20170703123025.7479702e@gandalf.local.home> <20170705084528.67499f8c@gandalf.local.home> <4080ecc7-1aa8-2940-f230-1b79d656cdb4@redhat.com> <20170705092757.63dc2328@gandalf.local.home> <20170705140607.GA30187@kroah.com> <20170705153259.GA7265@kroah.com> <20170706183249.60b2aef9@gandalf.local.home> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: <803733a4-491b-3303-5e22-a057d4eadd3d@osg.samsung.com> Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:40:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170706183249.60b2aef9@gandalf.local.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Carlos O'Donell , Thorsten Leemhuis , Shuah Khan , linux-api@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] & [TECH TOPIC] Improve regression tracking List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 07/06/2017 04:32 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 16:24:01 -0600 > Shuah Khan wrote: > > >> Over the past couple of years, kselftests have seen improvements to run >> on ARM in kernel ci rings. TAP13 will definitely make it easier to find >> run to run differences. There is the effort to use ksefltests to test >> stable releases (4.4 LTS for example), which will help make the tests >> fail/skip gracefully when a feature isn't enabled/supported. >> >> The work so far is two fold: >> >> - enable them to run in test rings. >> - making them easy to use >> >> As per test development, we are constantly adding tests and I see new tests >> getting added for sub-systems that aren't hardware dependent. You will see >> lots of activity in mm, timers, seccomp, net, sys-calls to name a few. >> >> I am going to be looking for TAP13 format compliance for new tests starting >> 4.13. >> >> I am not sure how popular they are among developers and sub-system maintainers >> though. Maybe this is one area we can try to improve usage. As a clarification, what I meant by "how popular they are among developers and sub-system maintainers" is that how often developers and sub-system maintainers run kselftests and are there any obstacles for running them. It would be good to get feedback on usage by us as in developers. > > Maybe this should be included in the MAINTAINERS SUMMIT as well. To > consolidate the format of all the kselftests and have something that > everyone (or most) developers agree on. thanks, -- Shuah