[Fuego] [LTSI-dev] Value of the Fuego to kernel "integrators"?

Bird, Timothy Tim.Bird at am.sony.com
Fri Sep 23 17:30:55 UTC 2016



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Crawford [mailto:dcrawford at zonoff.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 10:21 AM
> To: Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
> Cc: Bird, Timothy <Tim.Bird at am.sony.com>; ltsi-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org;
> fuego at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: [LTSI-dev] Value of the Fuego to kernel "integrators"?
> 
> 
> > On Sep 23, 2016, at 11:05 AM, Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:09:02AM -0400, Doug Crawford via LTSI-dev wrote:
> >> A perception in our organization is that Fuego is intended for kernel
> >> developers in the development of long term supported kernels.
> >> We are more “kernel integrators”;  we pick up LTS kernels through
> >> Yocto, and integrate them with our choice of file system and device
> >> drivers.
> >
> > What filesystems and device drivers do you use that are not already
> > upstream in the kernel.org releases?  Need any help getting them merged
> > properly?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
> 
> 
> Sorry if I mislead- we use only standard file systems.
> We sometimes use bug-fixed device drivers from the silicon vendors.
> We do not write any ourselves.
> 
> I’m trying to confirm that there would be a general consensus that it is a GOOD
> idea to consider running Fuego even against a system comprised of
> Kernels build from Yocto combined manufacturer device drivers.
> Seems to me that after a build with a custom configuration and combination of
> components it WOULD be a good idea.

Fuego should be able to be used to validate aspects of the system, no matter whether
the kernel is a vanilla mainline kernel from kernel.org, or LTS or LTSI, or a kernel with
vendor-specific extensions.  The same is true for the "distribution", which is the set
of libraries and filesystem used on the device.

What type of testing you want to do is up to you.  To be honest, we are in the early days
of Fuego, and while it is being used by some companies for SoC testing, for LTSI and AGL,
we have a ways to go before there's a suite of tests that someone can use "off-the-shelf"
to test all aspects of their system.  Fuego is a framework for test, and has some preexisting
ones, but building out a suite of tests for specific functional areas will take time.

What types of things do you want to test?  networking?  filesystems?, block devices?
memory?, performance?  operation under stress?, power management?  video?, audio?
specific driver functionality?  Some of these general ones are supported today with the
existing integrated tests.  But others require the creation or integration of new tests
for Fuego, and depend on the specific thing to be tested.  There will be some sessions
at the upcoming Embedded Linux Conference, where we'll be discussing the current
status, and specifically what people are using Fuego for now.  The results of these
discussion might help people decide if Fuego can be used for their purposes.

Also, we are in planning stages for a fuego-specific mini-jamboree, in Tokyo, towards
the end of October.

 -- Tim



More information about the Fuego mailing list