[Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] & [TECH TOPIC] Improve regression tracking

Mark Brown broonie at kernel.org
Thu Jul 6 09:28:36 UTC 2017


On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 01:02:00PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Guenter Roeck <linux at roeck-us.net> wrote:

> > If a test to reproduce a problem exists, it might be more beneficial to suggest
> > to the patch submitter that it would be great if that test would be submitted
> > as unit test instead of shaming that person for not doing so. Acknowledging and
> > praising kselftest submissions might help more than shaming for non-submissions.

> > My concern would be that once the shaming starts, it won't stop.

> I think this is a communication issue. My word for "shaming" was to
> call out a developer for not submitting a test. It wasn't about making
> fun of them, or anything like that. I was only making a point
> about how to teach people that they need to be more aware of the
> testing infrastructure. Not about actually demeaning people.

I think before anything like that is viable we need to show a concerted
and visible interest in actually running the tests we already have and
paying attention to the results - if people can see that they're just
checking a checkbox that will often result in low quality tests which
can do more harm than good.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/attachments/20170706/af1e936c/attachment.sig>


More information about the Ksummit-discuss mailing list