On 25/07/19 22:57, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 03:19:33PM -0500, Dan Rue wrote: >> I would still prefer to run the latest tests against all kernel versions >> (but better control when we upgrade it). Like I said, we can handle >> expected failures, and it would even help to validate backports for >> fixes that do get backported. I'm afraid on your behalf that snapping >> (and maintaining) branches per kernel branch is going to be a lot to >> manage. > > Having the branches would be beneficial for kernel developers as well, > e.g. on multiple occasions I've spent time hunting down non-existent KVM > bugs, only to realize my base kernel was stale with respect to kvm-unit-tests. > > My thought was to have a mostly-unmaintained branch for each major kernel > version, e.g. snapshot a working version of kvm_unit_tests when the KVM > pull request for the merge window is sent, and for the most part leave it > at that. I don't think it would introduce much overhead, but then again, > I'm not the person who would be maintaining this :-) > Yes, I agree. Stable backports that have fixes in kvm-unit-tests are relatively rare, so the branch would hardly move after a release is cut. Paolo
