Re: Re[2]: Kernel testing

Seth M. Landsman (
Sat, 12 Apr 1997 22:57:36 -0400 (EDT)

On Sat, 12 Apr 1997, Dave Wreski wrote:

> > Of course the testing suite will only be used by people who know
> > that they are using it, know what is being used and know what might
> > happen. I think it would be a wonderful idea to include some of the minor
> > tests, such as ensure system calls do what they should be doing as part of
> > the kernel suite (make test idea), but the stress tests are something
> > different.
> I would expect it to be treated as an rpm that someone could download and
> install, not something we would hide from them. I would think a nice way
> to do it would be to use this program when you think you have a bug, or
> your kernel crashes..

I do think that the kernel lacks basic tests which quite possibly
should be there. Just because it compiles doesn't mean that it is okay to
run and use. There should be a `make test` step in kernel compilation
that ensures some basic truisms about the kernel, such as return values of
functions and the ability to boot.
What is the concensus to this?

> Please, if this continues take it offline, before the developers get
> pissed.

I think that it is vitally important that the developers have
input into the nature of testing ... I agree that the network v.
non-network thread should die.