From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760007Ab0J2D5J (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Oct 2010 23:57:09 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:43042 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758315Ab0J2D5D (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Oct 2010 23:57:03 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=6ptpMFIBtxRk0xdOb6IhJTbTLVRlKjWFes7R4SsWCrA= c=1 sm=0 a=QDC8QjlfTZkA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:17 a=NZQaldp3rW1UCdqTPLIA:9 a=tvveKVTekCw1Lxhqxe8vhrMoBT0A:4 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 67.242.120.143 Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] ktest.pl: Easy and flexible testing script for Linux Kernel Developers From: Steven Rostedt To: Greg KH Cc: LKML , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Mathieu Desnoyers , Jon Masters , corbet , Jake Edge , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , lmr@redhat.com, autotest@test.kernel.org, Vivek Goyal , Clark Williams , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo In-Reply-To: <20101029034142.GA12125@suse.de> References: <1288294944.18238.346.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20101029002740.GA7688@suse.de> <1288321849.18238.395.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20101029034142.GA12125@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 23:56:59 -0400 Message-ID: <1288324619.18238.414.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 20:41 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > Should I try to get this into 2.6.37? Since it is a stand alone tool, I > > can hardly expect that it would break anything else. > > I don't see why not, but perhaps you might want to wait for people to > test it a bit? Then get it into .38? That's sorta the catch-22. We want testers before pushing it into mainline, but if it is in mainline we get more testers :-) I'm not sure it makes a difference now if it goes in or if it does not. Because it would reside in tools as a helper program, and will not affect the quality of the kernel whether it's in the kernel tree or not. Although, I could argue that it may help the quality of the kernel if it is in the kernel tree because it may have more people testing the kernel. One thing I worry about adding it to the tools directory. I could imagine someone running the tool from the tools directly from the build source that they are testing. If they do a bisect, a bisect may remove the tools directory while its running. That would be an interesting test ;-) -- Steve