On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Shuah Khan <shua...@osg.samsung.com> wrote: > On 02/25/2015 03:32 PM, John Stultz wrote: >> I've hosted my timekeeping tests on github for the last few years: >> https://github.com/johnstultz-work/timetests >> >> but I suspect not too many folks have actually used them. >> >> I've been meaning to get them reworked and submitted into the >> selftest infrastructure, but haven't had much time until >> recently. So I wanted to send this out and get any feedback >> to see if they might be able to get into shape for the 4.1 >> merge window. >> >> I've added both the non-desctructive and destructive tests >> (which set the time, possibly to strange values, or tries >> to trigger historical issues that could crash the machine). >> The destructive tests are run (as root, or with proper >> privledge) via: >> # make run_destructive_tests >> > > I quickly browsed through the tests. Looks good to me. One > comment on test run scope. Since timers now include destructive > tests, run_tests target should only run the non-destructive by > default and destructive tests.
Yes, agreed. That's why they are separated. > I didn't see the run_destructive_tests in this set of changes > in the timers/Makefile. ? See patch 10/19 for where run_destructive_tests gets introduced. > Please see cpu-hotplug and memory-hotplug as examples that > support default and full range tests. Would you rather the destructive tests be included in run_full_tests? Other then that, I've got a few compiler warning cleanup and a fix for CROSS_COMPILE, so I'll resbumit the set tomorrow or later this week. So let me know if there are any other changes you'd like and I'll roll those in. thanks -john -- 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/
