} On 22 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
}
} > Hi. I was wondering if there has been any discussion of kernel
} > regression testing. Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to depend
} > on human testers to verify every change didn't break something?
} >
} > OK, I'll admit I haven't given this a lot of thought. What I'm
} > wondering is whether the user-mode linux could help here (allow a way
} > to simulate controlled activity).
} > -
}
} Regression testing __is__ what happens when 10,000 testers independently
} try to break the software!
No, in fact that is not a regression test.
} Canned so-called "regression-test" schemes will fail to test at least
} 90 percent of the code paths, while attempting to "test" 100 percent
} of the code!
A canned set of regression tests would actually do what they're supposed to
- prevent the kernel from regressing. If you fix a bug - write a test for
that bug and keep running it. Something we follow for RTLinux that has
helped us immensely.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
