lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Oct]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Re: [PATCH ftrace/for-next ] tracing/kprobes: Replace startup test with selftest script
(2014/10/08 11:20), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 10:59:49 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com> wrote:
>
>>> Both of these have valid reasons staying in the kernel and I don't see
>>> either as dead weight. Is there a maintenance issue with keeping it in
>>> the kernel? There doesn't seem to be much done to it. It seems
>>> untouched for over a year, and that was to add support for multiple
>>> buffers.
>>
>> Keeping it has no issue. But it's much easier to expand the test
>> in userspace than the kernel code. I'll add more feature tests in
>> kselftest, but not in this code. This means that this startup
>> test code will get behind.
>
> And that's exactly what I expect you to do. I have lots of tests to
> test ftrace, but what gets tested at kernel startup is just a bare
> minimum, and that's all it needs to be. I don't expect you to extend
> the start up self tests. That should be only done for the scripts. But
> we have this start up test and I don't see a reason to get rid of it.
> If anything, it gives me warm fuzzies in my stomach when I see it
> pass :-)
>
> The start up tests in the kernel should really just be the basic of the
> basic tests, that give a small sanity check that a change didn't
> totally screw things up.
>
> Can you send a new patch that doesn't remove the start up test?

OK, I'll send it asap :)

Thank you,


--
Masami HIRAMATSU
Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Research Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-10-08 06:43    [W:0.056 / U:3.844 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site