lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:12:45PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote:
>
>
> > On Dec 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.4 release.
> > There are 95 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > let me know.
> >
> > Responses should be made by Wed Dec 6 16:00:27 UTC 2017.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> >
> > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.14.4-rc1.gz
> > or in the git tree and branch at:
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.14.y
> > and the diffstat can be found below.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
> >
>
> Compiled, booted and ran the following package unit tests without regressions on x86_64
>
> boringssl :
> go test target:0/0/5764/5764/5764 PASS
> ssl_test : 10 pass
> crypto_test : 28 pass
> e2fsprogs:
> make check : 340 pass
> sqlite
> make test : 143914 pass
> drm
> make check : 15 pass
> modetest, drmdevice : pass
> alsa-lib
> make check : 2 pass
> bluez
> make check : 25 pass
> libusb
> stress : 4 pass

How do the above tests stress the kernel? Aren't they just
verifications that the source code in the package is correct?

I guess it proves something, but have you ever seen the above regress in
_any_ kernel release?

I know the drm developers have a huge test suite that they use to verify
their kernel changes, why not use that?

thanks,

greg k-h

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-05 07:24    [W:0.230 / U:4.768 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site