From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PVeyq-0000nx-SD for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 06:48:52 +0000 Received: from [222.73.24.84] (helo=song.cn.fujitsu.com) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72) id 1PVeyp-0005PL-18 for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 06:48:52 +0000 Message-ID: <4D12F014.4010600@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:45:40 +0800 From: Bian Naimeng MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1920170050.25294.1292915503845.JavaMail.root@zmail06.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> <4D1057E0.4060000@cn.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH]Fix building error. List-Id: Linux Test Project General Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-list-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Garrett Cooper Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Dec 20, 2010, at 11:31 PM, Bian Naimeng wrote: > >> CAI Qian wrote: >>>> Could you tell me which kernels are this test fit to? >>> It is hard to tell. The old kernel might decide to back-port this feature. >> I see. >> >> Would you like tell me what's the test required? >> >> If the test is good, i think it should pass on old kernel which had back-port >> this feature, otherwise the back-port procedure is incorrect. > > Yes, assuming features are tied to specific versions is a bad idea; a lot of code in LTP does this in an effort to be correct as to when it was first implemented, but it's wrong because there are various groups who may have backported support for distro or product specific reasons :)... > >>>> If there is old KSM interface, and this test can not work correctly on >>>> it, i think we should fix the test, it should not do anything but reports >>>> "This test is unsupported!" >>> Anyway, it would be more code to test here and there rather than kernel version. Isn't LTP's guideline to only support the latest and greatest kernels? > > I wish. It would make life a lot easier, but that isn't the way that things are today (esp the folks on here that are running ancient versions of Redhat... *cough*)... and given that trying to track Linux changes is like trying to forecast the weather, stuff is always changing -- for better or for worse -- which makes it a pain for everyone else sitting out on the sidelines, like LTP, because Linux kernel devs don't actively engage test projects. > There isn't really a line drawn in the sand as far as what is and isn't supported by LTP, except between 2.4 and 2.6 kernels, and even that is murky in spots. Yes. However, many people use the LTP to test their own linux system, if those kernel is not support KSM, at least we should make sure they can build successfully. Regards Bian > Thanks, > -Garrett > -- Regards Bian Naimeng ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) One Node allows customers to consolidate database storage, standardize their database environment, and, should the need arise, upgrade to a full multi-node Oracle RAC database without downtime or disruption http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list