On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 04:28:16PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Nathan Straz wrote:
> > - The testing philosophy that is most important to the kernel
> > developers. What approach best fits the development process?
> > Regression? Functional? Stress? Performance?
>
> All of the above :) I think regression and stress are the two most
> important ones, but that's just one opinion..
That seems to be a common opinion. If anyone else has a different one,
I would like to hear it. I've heard that regression should come last
and functional should come first. I think that everything in functional
testing should occur in regression testing, so there isn't much
difference there.
> > - What is needed immediately? Building a test suite for the kernel is
> > going to take time. What tests or tools are most important?
> IMHO regression, then stress testing. Regression testing provides more
> stability of interface and code in the long run. Stress testing tools
> tend to focus on a few specific areas of the code, and be completely
> inadequate for covering certain cases.
Noted. Which areas in the kernel are most in need of regression
coverage? Stress testing? Dreaming of any tools that you need lately?
> > - We need to plan a development road map that works with the Linux
> > kernel development road map.
> Each vendor and kernel developer seems to have their own favorite set of
> tests; the building of a unified test suite should include many of these
> tests. VA Linux's Cerebus (sp?) and Juan Quintela's MM tests are good
> examples.
One of the goals of LTP is definately to create a unified collection of
useful tests and tools. Something that a new kernel tester can pick up
to quickly get up to speed. Aaron has been looking over Juan's tests
and definately likes them.
Nate
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 15 2000 - 21:00:20 EST