On Sun, 2009-08-02 at 16:21 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > e.g. running all the file system stress tests from LTP would be > > > a good idea, ideally multiple at a time on a multi processor > > > system on a ram disk or perhaps AIM9. > > > > Yeah good idea. But again, I fear my laptop hasn't enough memory > > to support big enough ramdisks mount points to host selftests. > > Well, dont waste too much time on it (beyond the due diligence > level) - Andi forgot that the right way to stress-test patches is to > get through the review process and then through the integration > trees which have far more test exposure than any single contributor > can test. > > Patch submitters cannot possibly test every crazy possibility that > is out there - nor should they: it just doesnt scale. What we expect > people to do is to write clean patches, to test the bits on their > own boxes and submit them to lkml and address specific review > feedback. Is this the case for patches against drivers which the submitter doesn't have or can't get a hold of? Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
