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 -- 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
