Re: [PATCH] RFC: perf, tools: Move gtk browser into separate perfgtkexecutable

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 05:57:16PM -0400, Vince Weaver escreveu:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2013, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > that can only be addressed by either extending 'perf test' or by testing 
> > libpfm et al sooner. The upstream kernel can only address regressions that 
> > get reported.
 
> Most of the tests in my test-suite are reactive.  Meaning, I wrote them 
> after an ABI-breaking change was reported elsewhere, and I needed a small 
> test case for bisection purposes.  Thus they are good for finding if a 
> corner of the perf ABI re-breaks but they're not great at spotting new 
> breakages.
 
> Writing a complete test suite for something as complicated as the 
> perf-event ABI is impractical.  One thing you can do is require anyone 
> submitting new functionality also provide a regression test, but

Agreed.

> I don't see that happening.

See some of Namhyung, Adrian and Jiri recent patchsets, they came with
'perf test' regression tests.
 
- ARnaldo
--
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/