linux-kernel - Re: [tip:perf/core] tools lib api fs: Remove debugfs, tracefs and findfs objects

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:08:15 +0100
From:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:	Vinson Lee <vlee@...pensource.com>, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, raphael.beamonte@...il.com,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
	Michael Petlan <mpetlan@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] tools lib api fs: Remove debugfs, tracefs and
 findfs objects

On Wed, 23 Sep, at 10:39:06AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 09:23:02AM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > 
> > Does automated testing exist for perf tools development?
> 
> heh, we've been playing game "who first mention it in public will implement it" ... you won! ;-)

Hehe, whoops!

> AFAIK we have: 
>   - 'perf test' for perf specific functionality
>   - 'make -f tests/make' for building
>   - build framework tests
> 
> I 'try' to run those before sending anything out, but we dont have
> automated thing that would run it any time Arnaldo push new perf/core.

Right. The problem with manual steps is that they're easy to forget.
Furthermore, it actively discourages you from adding new testing
functionality that requires more manual steps (who wants to remember
to type another command?).

Yes, you can script it, but then every developer ends up with their
own version, which get out of sync, or work slightly differently etc.

Also, now that we've potentially got perf arch tests coming [1] you or
Arnaldo may not always have the hardware available to ensure that no
regressions were introduced to the runtime testing, or the OS
installations to perform build testing, for say, Ubuntu or OpenSUSE.

That is kind of a separate problem (automated testing of a matrix of
OS and hardware configs), but having a single, standard way to
automate build/runtime testing of tools/perf is the first step.

> The RedHat QE has some more perf tool tests. There was some movement
> to make those public, but not sure how it ended up.. ccing Michael Petlan
> for news on this ;-)

Cool! I'd definitely be interested in knowing the details.

[1] - https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1441479742-15402-1-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/