Re: [ANNOUNCE] Reiserfs/kill-bkl tree v2

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Mon Aug 03 2009 - 02:10:35 EST



* Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> Yeah good idea. But again, I fear my laptop hasn't enough
> >> memory to support big enough ramdisks mount points to host
> >> selftests.
> >
> > Well, dont waste too much time on it (beyond the due diligence
> > level) - Andi forgot that the right way to stress-test patches
> > is to get through the review process and then through the
> > integration trees which have far more test exposure than any
> > single contributor can test.
>
> What guideline can you offer as to what is "due diligence" level
> of stress testing, as compared to delegating this task to
> eyeballed reviews + incidental use on the integration trees?

The kind of testing the VFS tree itself gets is a good starting
point i suspect - and it is a far more critical tree as it can
affects all filesystems. AFAICS the VFS tree relies on linux-next
and -mm for testing mostly and that's a good model IMO.

Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/