On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 23:58:22 +0900 Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This adds two testing scripts with notifier error injection Can we move these into tools/testing/selftests/, so that a "make run_tests" runs these tests? Also, I don't think it's appropriate that "fault-injection" be in the path - that's an implementation detail. What we're testing here is memory hotplug, pm, cpu hotplug, etc. So each test would go into, say, tools/testing/selftests/cpu-hotplug. Now, your cpu-hotplug test only tests a tiny part of the cpu-hotplug code. But it is a start, and creates the place where additional tests will be placed in the future. If the kernel configuration means that the tests cannot be run, the attempt should succeed so that other tests are not disrupted. I guess that printing a warning in this case is useful. Probably the selftests will require root permissions - we haven't really thought about that much. If these tests require root (I assume they do?) then a sensible approach would be to check for that and to emit a warning and return "success". My overall take on the fault-injection code is that there has been a disappointing amount of uptake: I don't see many developers using them for whitebox testing their stuff. I guess this patchset addresses that, in a way. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>