All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Brad Figg <brad.figg@canonical.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: Ubuntu Ext4 regression testing
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 19:20:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <505126D4.5030106@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5051177E.6000903@canonical.com>

On 9/12/12 6:15 PM, Brad Figg wrote:
> I'm going to be doing some new runs so anything I find will be reported.

Dave Chinner also pointed out that i.e.

http://kernel.ubuntu.com/beta/testing/test-results/statler.2012-09-11_22-42-47/xfstests/default/control

seems to redefine, re-group, exclude etc various tests, and is taking "intelligence" out of the test suite itself.

I'd be wary of that; xfstests is dynamic - things get fixed, tests get added, groups changed, etc.

If you hard code for example "this test is for xfs" somewhere else, you might miss updates which add coverage.

Another example :

	    #'197' : ['xfs'],# This test is only valid on 32 bit machines

but the test handles that gracefully:

bitsperlong=`src/feature -w`
if [ "$bitsperlong" -ne 32 ]; then
        _notrun "This test is only valid on 32 bit machines"
fi

In general any test should be runnable; it may then issue 'not run' for some reason or other, but there's no harm in it - not as much harm as skipping regression tests because some config file got out of date...

and:

	    #'275' : ['generic'] # ext4 fails

but I just fixed that one up, and it should pass now.  Who will update the 3rd party config?

Failing tests absolutely should be run as well.  That information is as valuable as passing tests.  The goal is getting a complete picture, not just a series of "pass" results.  :)

-Eric

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Brad Figg <brad.figg@canonical.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: Ubuntu Ext4 regression testing
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 19:20:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <505126D4.5030106@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5051177E.6000903@canonical.com>

On 9/12/12 6:15 PM, Brad Figg wrote:
> I'm going to be doing some new runs so anything I find will be reported.

Dave Chinner also pointed out that i.e.

http://kernel.ubuntu.com/beta/testing/test-results/statler.2012-09-11_22-42-47/xfstests/default/control

seems to redefine, re-group, exclude etc various tests, and is taking "intelligence" out of the test suite itself.

I'd be wary of that; xfstests is dynamic - things get fixed, tests get added, groups changed, etc.

If you hard code for example "this test is for xfs" somewhere else, you might miss updates which add coverage.

Another example :

	    #'197' : ['xfs'],# This test is only valid on 32 bit machines

but the test handles that gracefully:

bitsperlong=`src/feature -w`
if [ "$bitsperlong" -ne 32 ]; then
        _notrun "This test is only valid on 32 bit machines"
fi

In general any test should be runnable; it may then issue 'not run' for some reason or other, but there's no harm in it - not as much harm as skipping regression tests because some config file got out of date...

and:

	    #'275' : ['generic'] # ext4 fails

but I just fixed that one up, and it should pass now.  Who will update the 3rd party config?

Failing tests absolutely should be run as well.  That information is as valuable as passing tests.  The goal is getting a complete picture, not just a series of "pass" results.  :)

-Eric

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-13  0:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-12 22:52 Ubuntu Ext4 regression testing Brad Figg
2012-09-12 23:01 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-09-12 23:01   ` Eric Sandeen
2012-09-12 23:15   ` Brad Figg
2012-09-12 23:15     ` Brad Figg
2012-09-13  0:20     ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2012-09-13  0:20       ` Eric Sandeen
2012-09-13  0:41       ` Brad Figg
2012-09-13  0:41         ` Brad Figg
2012-09-13  1:51         ` Eric Sandeen
2012-09-13  1:51           ` Eric Sandeen
2012-09-13  2:04           ` Brad Figg
2012-09-13  2:04             ` Brad Figg
2012-09-13  2:09             ` Eric Sandeen
2012-09-13  2:17               ` Brad Figg
2012-09-13  2:17                 ` Brad Figg
2012-09-13  2:24               ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-09-13  2:24                 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-09-13  2:18 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-09-13  2:50   ` Brad Figg
2012-09-19  3:41     ` Theodore Ts'o

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=505126D4.5030106@redhat.com \
    --to=sandeen@redhat.com \
    --cc=brad.figg@canonical.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.