From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: LTP List <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Cc: Xiao Yang <yangx.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] Create policy for testing unstable kernel features
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 14:31:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yqh/kqJBv2xgV3O1@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YiDDoly4t0N30kfo@pevik>
Hi all,
as there is another set of fanotify tests for rc kernel, I'd really like to have
some policy. Therefore I suggest to stick policy suggested by Richie in this
patchset [1], i.e. adding tests into runtest/staging until mainline kernel with
this functionality is released (feature is part of the stable kernel ABI).
i.e. each kernel release content of this file must be revised and (ideally)
moved to particular runtest file where it should belong or fixed (in rare
situations when feature changed) or removed (feature was reverted).
I volunteer to maintain runtest/staging.
This feature got already ack from Mike Frysinger, Li Wang, Jan Stancek (and me).
I'll wait little longer for ack from others (Yang Xu, Cyril Hrubis).
Anybody against it?
"remove_after_release" solution [2] suggested by Cyril and Richie, which would
keep kernel version could be quite easily implemented. But IMHO it's not worth
with current number of tests which need it (< 5, often 1 or 0).
Obviously I suggest to drop my original suggestion [2] (it didn't include
runtest/staging).
Kind regards,
Petr
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/20220203101803.10204-1-rpalethorpe@suse.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/YdW5WEXgrotentzM@yuki/
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/20211210134556.26091-1-pvorel@suse.cz/
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-14 12:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20211220180748.36A90A3B8E@relay2.suse.de>
2021-12-21 11:30 ` [LTP] [RFC PATCH] API: Allow testing of kernel features in development Richard Palethorpe via ltp
2021-12-21 12:14 ` Li Wang
2021-12-21 13:56 ` Richard Palethorpe
2021-12-21 17:56 ` Petr Vorel
2021-12-22 8:41 ` Jan Stancek
2021-12-22 8:44 ` Richard Palethorpe
2021-12-22 9:29 ` Petr Vorel
2022-01-05 15:57 ` Cyril Hrubis
2022-01-05 16:00 ` Cyril Hrubis
2022-01-10 8:09 ` Richard Palethorpe
2022-01-28 12:32 ` Petr Vorel
2022-02-03 10:18 ` [LTP] [PATCH] Create policy for testing unstable kernel features Richard Palethorpe via ltp
2022-02-03 10:22 ` Petr Vorel
2022-02-04 7:46 ` Jan Stancek
2022-02-08 8:18 ` Li Wang
2022-03-03 13:33 ` Petr Vorel
2022-06-14 12:31 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2022-06-14 13:13 ` Cyril Hrubis
2022-06-16 8:25 ` Petr Vorel
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=Yqh/kqJBv2xgV3O1@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=rpalethorpe@suse.com \
--cc=yangx.jy@cn.fujitsu.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox