Em Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 05:57:16PM -0400, Vince Weaver escreveu: > On Tue, 13 Aug 2013, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > that can only be addressed by either extending 'perf test' or by testing > > libpfm et al sooner. The upstream kernel can only address regressions that > > get reported. > Most of the tests in my test-suite are reactive. Meaning, I wrote them > after an ABI-breaking change was reported elsewhere, and I needed a small > test case for bisection purposes. Thus they are good for finding if a > corner of the perf ABI re-breaks but they're not great at spotting new > breakages. > Writing a complete test suite for something as complicated as the > perf-event ABI is impractical. One thing you can do is require anyone > submitting new functionality also provide a regression test, but
Agreed. > I don't see that happening. See some of Namhyung, Adrian and Jiri recent patchsets, they came with 'perf test' regression tests. - ARnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
