On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Martin Husemann <mar...@duskware.de> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 11:54:23AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote: >> BTW, we may need ATF tests to ring the bell for such regressions. > > This is a bit tricky to do as we do not expose a sane api to create > "old binaries" from source. It would boil down to copy & paste of the old > structure definition and some magic to test ioctls with them.
Hmm, in this case, a test with a new userland binary (7.99.2) and a new kernel (7.99.2) can expose the regression. So I thought we need to add a test that does ioctl(SIOCGIFCONF) (or just run ifconfig with no argument). ozaki-r > > Testing the ioctls itself against a rump kernel is very simple. > > But then you'll have to install helpers (like rump.ifconfig but for various > ioctl versions) and it quickly gets messy. > > So no easy/safe/scalable way there that I can see. The other option that > comes to mind is running a -current kernel and doing a -7 and -6 release > branch test run. Unfortunately that will include all RUMP components from that > branch as well, so not test the compatibility we are looking for either. > > But I guess we should think about rearrangements in this direction to make > it easier in the future - starting with a separate rump.tgz set, or maybe > a few of them, not sure what granularity would be needed there. > > Antti, Justin, can we separate the rump userland from the rump kernel > binaries easily and put them in different sets, and then run the userland > from -6 or -7 against the (rump-)kernel from -current? > > Martin
