Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 01 Dec 2004 23:26:59 -0800 | From | "Martin J. Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: page fault scalability patch V12 [0/7]: Overview and performance tests |
| |
--Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote (on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 23:02:17 -0800):
> Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote: >> >> Andrew Morton wrote: >> > We need to be be achieving higher-quality major releases than we did in >> > 2.6.8 and 2.6.9. Really the only tool we have to ensure this is longer >> > stabilisation periods. >> >> >> I'm still hoping that distros (like my employer) and orgs like OSDL will >> step up, and hook 2.6.x BK snapshots into daily test harnesses. > > I believe that both IBM and OSDL are doing this, or are getting geared up > to do this. With both Linus bk and -mm.
I already run a bunch of tests on a variety of machines for every new kernel ... but don't have an automated way to compare the results as yet, so don't actually look at them much ;-(. Sometime soon (quite possibly over Christmas) things will calm down enough I'll get a couple of days to write the appropriate perl script, and start publishing stuff.
> However I have my doubts about how useful it will end up being. These test > suites don't seem to pick up many regressions. I've challenged Gerrit to > go back through a release cycle's bugfixes and work out how many of those > bugs would have been detected by the test suite. > > My suspicion is that the answer will be "a very small proportion", and that > really is the bottom line.
Yeah, probably. Though the stress tests catch a lot more than the functionality ones. The big pain in the ass is drivers, because I don't have a hope in hell of testing more than 1% of them.
M. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |