On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed 04-01-17 11:57:04, Amir Goldstein wrote: ... >> Yes, I am aware of those testcases. >> I find LTP quite heavy to build, so I though I would spin a dedicated >> testsuite that will contain your testcases, but will also include >> infrastructure for stress testing and profiling. >> Keeping track of performance regressions is clearly a major aspect >> of maintaining fsnotify. > > Yeah, I don't build full LTP, just testcases in those two directories. LTP seems to have this massive build system around it. So just to give me a head start, do you use any custom build scripts to build just those testcases? or simple make inside their directory will do the trick (it didn't seem so simple from first look). > The > advantage of LTP is that quite a few people run it so you get a decent test > coverage on different systems (and I've got reports from people running LTP > about regressions in fsnotify code). So I'd prefer to have the functional > tests in LTP if reasonably feasible. Sure. That's makes a lot of sense. > But with respect to performance > testing or some crazy stress tests which take long to execute I can definitely > see space for a dedicated test suite. > > Honza > -- > Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> > SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
