Test harness in the kernel for new syscalls? [Was: Trace code and documentation (updated)]

[Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>]

On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 06:51:09PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 07:48:45PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > Well, this is kernel code - so util-linux is not the solution here
> > > obviously :)
> > 
> > Can you sketch what you have in mind.
> > We right now have said we wnated to:
> > 1) include a framework for executing simple new-syscall-test-stubs
> > 2) have a nice place for kernel example code
> > 
> > I could come up with something but I expect you already have something
> > in your mind where to put stuff.
> > If I have a rough idea I can start looking into the kbuild bits of it.
> > Not that I will have it ready within the next two weeks but nice buffer
> > when I anyway drop sleeping..
> 
> I think for samples we just want a samples/ toplevel directory with
> normal Kbuild and Kconfig files.  Not any different from drivers or
> filesystems, just a new hiearchary.

OK - anyone can do this. So I will not worry.


> tests stuff was rather disliked by Linus, so I wonder wether we should
> go ahead with it.
I heard it like "Ok for new syscalls".

And it is resonable for new syscalls because:
  o Make the test of the syscall public
  o Is a nice example of the usage of the syscalls (both good and bad cases)
  o Is availbale for other platforms that plan to implement the same syscall
  o We (at least a few sufficiently skilled ones) will then review not only
    the syscall but also the use of the syscall

>  We'd need a test driver like expect to driver the
> testcases.
OK - may give it a spin one day.
But I hope someone that have done similar stuff can come
with some example code we can adapt to the kernel.

	Sam