Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] FS, MM, and stable trees

[Jon Masters]

On 2/13/19 2:52 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 02:25:12PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:

>> So really, it sounds like a low hanging fruit: we don't really need to
>> write much more testing code code nor do we have to refactor existing
>> test suites. We just need to make sure the right tests are running on
>> stable kernels. I really want to clarify what each subsystem sees as
>> "sufficient" (and have that documented somewhere).
> 
> kernel.ci and 0-day and Linaro are starting to add the fs and mm tests
> to their test suites to address these issues (I think 0-day already has
> many of them).  So this is happening, but not quite obvious.  I know I
> keep asking Linaro about this :(

We're working on investments for LDCG[0] in 2019 that include kernel CI
changes for server use cases. Please keep us informed of what you folks
ultimately want to see, and I'll pass on to the steering committee too.

Ultimately I've been pushing for a kernel 0-day project for Arm. That's
probably going to require a lot of duplicated effort since the original
0-day project isn't open, but creating an open one could help everyone.

Jon.

[0] Linaro DataCenter Group (formerly "LEG")