Am 29.03.2015 um 17:36 schrieb Hajime Tazaki: > > > At Sat, 28 Mar 2015 22:17:40 +0100, > Richard Weinberger wrote: > >>> Continuous testing is paramount. Running the kernel as >>> a lib provides an unparalleled method for testing most of >>> the kernel. It will improve testing capabilities >>> dramatically, >>> and on the flipside it will keep the libos working. >>> Everyone wins. >> >> If it can be done cheap, yes. But our in-kernel tests improved over the years a lot. >> Now have lockdep, KASan, kmemleak, etc. to find *real-world* issues and the need for stubbed testing >> decreases. > > let me take the same example I raised. > > - Patchwork [net-next] xfrm6: Fix a offset value for network header in _decode_session6 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/436351/ > > without stubbed testing (I didn't know this term btw), we > can't decrease untested paths of the code. > > the above bug is for Mobile IPv6, which not so many people > are using though, but it's certainly a regression for a > person. > > testing framework with libos is based on a network > simulator, with a slight decreased realism (but it can > detect a real bug !), but provides a lightweight multi-node > testing framework with a single test scenario script to > control over the nodes. > > it doesn't require heavyweight machines nor complex cabling > for a bunch of tests. > > even a framework is not cheap, I would use such a testing > tool IF we can improve the code. plus (as you may know), it > certainly reduces the maintenance effort once it's automated. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that this kind of testing is good. But as I said before we have to keep the maintenance burden in mind. Let's wait a bit what Arnd says. He is the Linux arch maintainer. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
