Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 22:55:01 +0800
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, shuah@kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, yi1.li@linux.intel.com,
        takahiro.akashi@linaro.org, Martin Fuzzey <mfuzzey@parkeon.com>,
        Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures
Message-ID: <20170619145501.GA2400@kroah.com>
References: <CAO_48GFNXyqTDN85y8FKLV3wj19JJ28sWXuX4Vex3LVzaxzGCw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170616164651.GA21846@wotan.suse.de>
 <20170616192952.GA22037@kroah.com>
 <20170616194721.GE21846@wotan.suse.de>
 <20170617041635.GA26923@kroah.com>
 <20170619144805.GF21846@wotan.suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170619144805.GF21846@wotan.suse.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1405
Lines: 27

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 04:48:05PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 06:16:35AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 09:47:21PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > Some of the knobs however are for extending tests for
> > > existing APIs in older kernels, the async and custom fallback one are an
> > > example.  There are a series of test cases later added which could help
> > > test LTS kernels. Would Linaro pick these test driver enhancements to help
> > > increase coverage of tests? Or is it not worth it? If its worth it then
> > > what I was curious was how to help make this easier for this process to
> > > bloom.
> > 
> > I don't understand, what do you mean by "pick these test driver
> > enhancements"?  What kind of "knobs" are there in tests?  Shouldn't the
> > tests "just work" with no kind of special configuration of the tests be
> > needed?  No user is going to know to enable something special.
> 
> Test driver knobs, so for instance the async and custom patches referenced
> enable the shell script to use the async api and the custom API.

Ah, testing kernel code, that makes more sense.  I don't really know, if
the apis are present in the older kernel trees, I don't have a problem
having them be backported to stable kernel releases, as this isn't code
that people are actually running on a "normal" system.

thanks,

greg k-h