[Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] & [TECH TOPIC] Improve regression tracking
Mark Brown
broonie at kernel.org
Fri Jul 7 10:03:40 UTC 2017
On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 07:48:05AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-07-06 at 10:28 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > 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.
> it depends what you mean by "we". I used to run a battery of tests
> over every SCSI commit. It was time consuming and slowed down the
We as a community, I think something viable needs to be central services
like kernelci that's automated and allows multiple people to be involved
with the analysis. Hand running tests at scale just doesn't.
> The corollary I take away from this is that the less intrusive the test
> infrastructure is (at least to my process) the happier I am. The 0day
> quantum leap for me was going from testing my tree and telling me of
> problems after I've added the patch to testing patches posted to the
> mailing list, which tells me of problems *before* the commit gets added
> to the tree.
I think we'd get a long way just by looking at what's ending up in -next
- it's not as good as detecting things before they go in but it's
workable if people keep on top of things.
-------------- 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/20170707/55deaa10/attachment.sig>
More information about the Ksummit-discuss
mailing list