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 19E1AB5E for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:42:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80488F3 for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:42:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 20:42:45 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Steven Rostedt Message-ID: <20170705184245.GA22044@kroah.com> 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> <20170705115219.02370220@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170705115219.02370220@gandalf.local.home> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Carlos O'Donell , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Thorsten Leemhuis , Shuah Khan Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] & [TECH TOPIC] Improve regression tracking List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 11:52:19AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > So take Carlos's advice, start small, do it for your subsystem if you > > Yes, lets start small. What do you think about all reproducers getting > into selftests? If it's not 100% reproducing, then it's up to the > individual, but any test that can trigger a bug 100% should be added. That would be great. One could argue that we should be adding the "stack guard" testing apps to the selftest tree now, as a number of us have them floating around in their test directories at the moment. > I'd like to expand selftests to include configs too. If there's a > config that triggers a bug, that should be added to a list of "configs" > to be tested as well. So a test needs a specific configuration? We need a way to specify that in a generic fashion so that all tests don't have to duplicate that logic. Time to write a helper function to parse /proc/config.gz :) thanks, greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] & [TECH TOPIC] Improve regression tracking Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 20:42:45 +0200 Message-ID: <20170705184245.GA22044@kroah.com> 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> <20170705115219.02370220@gandalf.local.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170705115219.02370220-f9ZlEuEWxVcJvu8Pb33WZ0EMvNT87kid@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Guenter Roeck , Carlos O'Donell , linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Thorsten Leemhuis , ksummit-discuss-cunTk1MwBs98uUxBSJOaYoYkZiVZrdSR2LY78lusg7I@public.gmane.org, Shuah Khan List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 11:52:19AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > So take Carlos's advice, start small, do it for your subsystem if you > > Yes, lets start small. What do you think about all reproducers getting > into selftests? If it's not 100% reproducing, then it's up to the > individual, but any test that can trigger a bug 100% should be added. That would be great. One could argue that we should be adding the "stack guard" testing apps to the selftest tree now, as a number of us have them floating around in their test directories at the moment. > I'd like to expand selftests to include configs too. If there's a > config that triggers a bug, that should be added to a list of "configs" > to be tested as well. So a test needs a specific configuration? We need a way to specify that in a generic fashion so that all tests don't have to duplicate that logic. Time to write a helper function to parse /proc/config.gz :) thanks, greg k-h