Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures
From: Luis R. Rodriguez
Date: Mon Jun 19 2017 - 13:32:54 EST
On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:55:01PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 04:48:05PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 06:16:35AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 09:47:21PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > > Some of the knobs however are for extending tests for
> > > > existing APIs in older kernels, the async and custom fallback one are an
> > > > example. There are a series of test cases later added which could help
> > > > test LTS kernels. Would Linaro pick these test driver enhancements to help
> > > > increase coverage of tests? Or is it not worth it? If its worth it then
> > > > what I was curious was how to help make this easier for this process to
> > > > bloom.
> > >
> > > I don't understand, what do you mean by "pick these test driver
> > > enhancements"? What kind of "knobs" are there in tests? Shouldn't the
> > > tests "just work" with no kind of special configuration of the tests be
> > > needed? No user is going to know to enable something special.
> > Test driver knobs, so for instance the async and custom patches referenced
> > enable the shell script to use the async api and the custom API.
> Ah, testing kernel code, that makes more sense. I don't really know, if
> the apis are present in the older kernel trees, I don't have a problem
> having them be backported to stable kernel releases, as this isn't code
> that people are actually running on a "normal" system.
Wonderful, will peg test-driver changes as stable then when this fits. I really
do think this will make test coverage better.