Re: [LSF/MM/BPF ATTEND][LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] : blktests: status, expansion plan for the storage stack test framework

Johannes Thumshirn
2026-02-12T07:57:40Z

On 2/12/26 8:52 AM, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 08:35:30PM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
>>   For the storage track at LSFMMBPF2026, I propose a session dedicated to
>>   blktests to discuss expansion plan and CI integration progress.
>>
>> - The recent addition of kmemleak shows it's a great idea to enable more
>> of the kernel test infrastructure when running the tests. Are there
>> more such things we could/should enable?

One thing that comes to my mind (and that I always wanted to do for
fstests but didn't for $REASONS) is adding per-test code coverage
information.

Something like the per test kmemleak and dmesg output. This way one can
check that the test case is actually executing the code it intended to
test. Also its a good way to see which areas of code lack proper testing.

Just my $.05.

Byte,

Johannes