workflows.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ricardo Cañuelo" <ricardo.canuelo@collabora.com>
To: Nikolai Kondrashov <Nikolai.Kondrashov@redhat.com>
Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org, joe@perches.com, apw@canonical.com,
	tytso@mit.edu, davidgow@google.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	broonie@kernel.org, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, djwong@kernel.org,
	kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	vkabatov@redhat.com, cki-project@redhat.com,
	kernelci@lists.linux.dev, Nikolai.Kondrashov@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] MAINTAINERS: Introduce V: field for required tests
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 14:30:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sf50imba.fsf@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231115175146.9848-2-Nikolai.Kondrashov@redhat.com> (message from Nikolai Kondrashov on Wed, 15 Nov 2023 19:43:49 +0200)

Hi Nikolai,

On mié, nov 15 2023 at 19:43:49, Nikolai Kondrashov <Nikolai.Kondrashov@redhat.com> wrote:
> Introduce a new tag, 'Tested-with:', documented in the
> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst file. The tag is expected
> to reference the documented test suites, similarly to the 'V:' field,
> and to certify that the submitter executed the test suite on the change,
> and that it passed.

I think the 'V:' field in MAINTAINERS is a good addition to document
what developers are supposed to test for every subsystem, but in the
case of the per-commit "Tested-with:" tag, I think the real value of it
would be in using it for accountability and traceability purposes
instead, that is, to link to the actual results of the (automatic) tests
that were used to validate a commit.

This would provide two important features:

1. Rather than trusting that the tester did things right and that the
   test environment used was appropriate, we'd now have proof that the
   test results are as expected and a way to reproduce the steps.

2. A history of test results for future reference. When a regression is
   introduced, now we'd have more information about how things worked
   back when the test was still passing.

This is not trivial because tests vary a lot and we'd first need to
define which artifacts to link to, and because whatever is linked (test
commands, output log, results summary) would need to be stored
forever. But since we're doing that already for basically all kernel
mailing lists, I wonder if something like "public-inbox for test
results" could be possible some day.

Cheers,
Ricardo

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-11-20 13:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-11-15 17:43 [RFC PATCH 0/3] " Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-15 17:43 ` [PATCH 1/3] " Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-15 18:31   ` Joe Perches
2023-11-15 20:01     ` Mark Brown
2023-11-16 12:00     ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-15 20:14   ` Mark Brown
2023-11-16 12:09     ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-15 20:38   ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2023-11-16 12:14     ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-16 13:26       ` Mark Brown
2023-11-16 13:52         ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-20 12:40       ` Gustavo Padovan
2023-11-20 13:31         ` Mark Brown
2023-11-22 17:41         ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-16 13:20   ` Bagas Sanjaya
2023-11-16 13:41     ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-16 13:43       ` Bagas Sanjaya
2023-11-16 13:59     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-11-16 14:21     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-11-20 13:30   ` Ricardo Cañuelo [this message]
2023-11-20 20:51     ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-11-20 22:27       ` Mark Brown
2023-11-21  6:04         ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-11-21 10:37           ` David Gow
2023-11-21 13:27           ` Mark Brown
2023-11-22 16:16             ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-11-21 18:24       ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-21 18:02     ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-21 10:36   ` David Gow
2023-11-21 20:48     ` Mark Brown
2023-11-22 17:19     ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-22  1:08   ` kernel test robot
2023-11-15 17:43 ` [PATCH 2/3] MAINTAINERS: Require kvm-xfstests smoke for ext4 Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-15 18:58   ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-11-16 16:33     ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-17  7:09     ` Chandan Babu R
2023-11-19 22:54       ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-11-22 14:44         ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-22 16:17           ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-11-22 17:44             ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-22 20:51             ` Dave Chinner
2023-11-15 17:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] MAINTAINERS: Require kunit core tests for framework changes Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-11-20 18:48   ` Daniel Latypov
2023-11-22 17:38     ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/10] MAINTAINERS: Introduce V: entry for tests Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:02   ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/10] get_maintainer: Survive querying missing files Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:55     ` Joe Perches
2023-12-06 16:16       ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2024-01-31 13:55       ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:02   ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/10] MAINTAINERS: Introduce V: entry for tests Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:58     ` Joe Perches
2023-12-06 16:21       ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-06  8:12     ` David Gow
2023-12-06 16:23       ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-06 16:38         ` Joe Perches
2023-12-06 16:57           ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:02   ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/10] MAINTAINERS: Propose kunit core tests for framework changes Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:03   ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/10] docs: submitting-patches: Introduce Tested-with: Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:59     ` Jonathan Corbet
2023-12-05 19:07       ` Joe Perches
2023-12-06 10:07         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-12-06 16:46         ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-06 16:31       ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:03   ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/10] checkpatch: Propose tests to execute Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:03   ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/10] MAINTAINERS: Support referencing test docs in V: Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-06  8:03     ` David Gow
2023-12-06 16:54       ` Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:03   ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/10] MAINTAINERS: Propose kvm-xfstests smoke for ext4 Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:03   ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/10] docs: tests: Document kunit in general Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:03   ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/10] MAINTAINERS: Propose kunit tests for regmap Nikolai Kondrashov
2023-12-05 18:03   ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/10] MAINTAINERS: Add proposal strength to V: entries Nikolai Kondrashov
2024-01-08 10:42   ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/10] MAINTAINERS: Introduce V: entry for tests Nikolai Kondrashov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87sf50imba.fsf@collabora.com \
    --to=ricardo.canuelo@collabora.com \
    --cc=Nikolai.Kondrashov@redhat.com \
    --cc=apw@canonical.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=cki-project@redhat.com \
    --cc=davidgow@google.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=kernelci@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=vkabatov@redhat.com \
    --cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox