Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Maintainer's Summit 2017 Feedback Thread

["greg@kroah.com" <greg@kroah.com>]

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 09:27:37PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-10-30 at 22:20 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 05:42:33PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2017-10-29 at 06:08 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > > Please reply to this thread if you have any comments about how we can
> > > > organize the Maintainer's Summit for next year.  Given that Linus
> > > > seemed fairly happy with how things went, it's likely we will stick
> > > > with the same format for next year, but if there are any details about
> > > > how we could do things better, I'd greatly appreciate them.
> > > 
> > > Something Linus was very clear about is that regressions are not acceptable.
> > > The best way I know to reduce the number of regressions is to increase the
> > > efforts on automatic testing. Should the number of tests that is run by the
> > > zero-day testing infrastructure be increased? Should more tests be added?
> > 
> > Are there tests out there that 0-day does not currently run?  If there
> > are any out there that 0-day should run that it does not, you can always
> > add new ones, the 0-day client code is on github...
> 
> 0-day is the only test infrastructure of which I know that it is run
> automatically for the Linux kernel.

There are many others, kernel.ci is one of them, the link Konstantin
pointed to has a larger list.

> How should a developer decide which project
> to add new tests to: 0-day, ltp (Linux Test Project), ktest, xfstests, blktests
> or any other Linux kernel testing project that I am not aware of?

It depends on what type of test you are wanting to add.  And you forgot
kselftest :)

thanks,

greg k-h