On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2 Jul 2017 19:51:43 +0200 [..] >> >> Ugh, pretty long mail. Sorry about that. Maybe I shouldn't have looked >> so closely into LWN.net articles about regression tracking and older >> discussions about it. > > Anyway, I know that selftests are not the answer for everything, but > anything that has a way to reproduce a bug should be added to it. Sure, > it may depend on various hardware and/or file systems and different > configs, but if we have a central location to place all bug reproducing > tests (which we do have), then we should utilize it. I agree with Steven, and I would add that you don't necessarily need specific hardware to write a test for a driver regression, see examples in tools/testing/nvdimm. I also tend to think that back-stopping regressions with new tests helps with the burn-out problem of tracking regressions. Where building tools and tests is potentially more fulfilling than just bug tracking. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
