On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:12:45PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: > > > > On Dec 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > > wrote: > > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.4 release. > > There are 95 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > > let me know. > > > > Responses should be made by Wed Dec 6 16:00:27 UTC 2017. > > Anything received after that time might be too late. > > > > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at: > > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.14.4-rc1.gz > > or in the git tree and branch at: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git > > linux-4.14.y > > and the diffstat can be found below. > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > > > Compiled, booted and ran the following package unit tests without regressions > on x86_64 > > boringssl : > go test target:0/0/5764/5764/5764 PASS > ssl_test : 10 pass > crypto_test : 28 pass > e2fsprogs: > make check : 340 pass > sqlite > make test : 143914 pass > drm > make check : 15 pass > modetest, drmdevice : pass > alsa-lib > make check : 2 pass > bluez > make check : 25 pass > libusb > stress : 4 pass
How do the above tests stress the kernel? Aren't they just verifications that the source code in the package is correct? I guess it proves something, but have you ever seen the above regress in _any_ kernel release? I know the drm developers have a huge test suite that they use to verify their kernel changes, why not use that? thanks, greg k-h
