On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/05/2017 08:27 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> >> On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 08:16:33 -0700 >> Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > [ ... ] >>> >>> >>> If we start shaming people for not providing unit tests, all we'll >>> accomplish is >>> that people will stop providing bug fixes. >> >> >> I need to be clearer on this. What I meant was, if there's a bug >> where someone has a test that easily reproduces the bug, then if >> there's not a test added to selftests for said bug, then we should >> shame those into doing so. >> > > I don't think that public shaming of kernel developers is going to work > any better than public shaming of children or teenagers. > > Maybe a friendlier approach would be more useful ? > > If a test to reproduce a problem exists, it might be more beneficial to > suggest > to the patch submitter that it would be great if that test would be > submitted > as unit test instead of shaming that person for not doing so. Acknowledging > and > praising kselftest submissions might help more than shaming for > non-submissions. > >> A bug that is found by inspection or hard to reproduce test cases are >> not applicable, as they don't have tests that can show a regression. >> > > My concern would be that once the shaming starts, it won't stop. Agreed, this shouldn't be a new burden for maintainers, this should be a contribution path for new kernel developers. Go beyond our standard "fix a bug" advice, which is a great advice, and also recommend "backstop a regression with a unit test". -- 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
