[Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] stable workflow

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 01:02:44PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 17:48:42 +0100
> Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:06:52PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > 
> > > Well, I don't think there's any answer to that. But I still think it's
> > > better than nothing. If nobody has the hardware, do we ever care if it
> > > gets tested? ;-)  
> > 
> > I think it'd be better to split such tests out so that there's a clear
> > distinction between those that we can tell should run reliably and those
> > that have some hardware dependency.  That way people who just want a
> > predicatable testsuite without worrying if there's something wrong in
> > the environment can get one.
> 
> Perhaps we should create a separate directory in kselftests for
> "hardware dependent" tests.

Tests could depend on a list of soft kconfig entries, which map to
device drivers present -- whether built-in or modules, at run time it
should then be possible to ensure such kconfig symbols are available.
This of course depends on there being a deterministic mapping of
hardware devices to kconfig symbols, which we don't yet have.

  Luis