From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Reiserfs/kill-bkl tree v2 Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 16:21:00 +0200 Message-ID: <20090802142100.GA21160@elte.hu> References: <20090731174642.GA6539@nowhere> <20090801081141.GA18036@basil.fritz.box> <20090801155335.GA4836@nowhere> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090801155335.GA4836@nowhere> Sender: reiserfs-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: Andi Kleen , LKML , Jeff Mahoney , Chris Mason , Alexander Beregalov , Bron Gondwana , Reiserfs , Al Viro , Andrea Gelmini , "Trenton D. Adams" , Thomas Meyer , Alessio Igor Bogani , Marcel Hilzinger , Edward Shishkin * Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > e.g. running all the file system stress tests from LTP would be > > a good idea, ideally multiple at a time on a multi processor > > system on a ram disk or perhaps AIM9. > > Yeah good idea. But again, I fear my laptop hasn't enough memory > to support big enough ramdisks mount points to host selftests. Well, dont waste too much time on it (beyond the due diligence level) - Andi forgot that the right way to stress-test patches is to get through the review process and then through the integration trees which have far more test exposure than any single contributor can test. Patch submitters cannot possibly test every crazy possibility that is out there - nor should they: it just doesnt scale. What we expect people to do is to write clean patches, to test the bits on their own boxes and submit them to lkml and address specific review feedback. Ingo