On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 8:48 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 16:37:29 -0700 > >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Lucas Bates <luc...@mojatatu.com> wrote: >>> Apologies for sending this as one big patch. I've been sitting on this a >>> little >>> too long, but it's ready and I wanted to get it out. >>> >>> There are a limited number of tests to start - I plan to add more on a >>> regular >>> basis. >>> >>> Lucas Bates (1): >>> selftests: Introduce tc testsuite >> >> Nice work! >> >> Is there any particular reason you want to put these tests in kernel tree >> especially tools/testing/selftests/ ? > > Yeah, it would be absolutely terrible if we had more tests in the > kernel selftests area for networking. > > More seriously, we need more, not less, tests in the kernel networking > selftests directory. > > It doesn't belong in iproute2 because we want a place to put things > that automatically get tested when someone makes kernel changes and > can be integrated into the kernel development workflow. > > I want as many tests as possible under there, so I'm really surprised > that you're asking "why" tests are being added there.
I thought tools/testing/selftests/ is mainly for those tests close to kernel ABI and API. What is the criteria for these tests? If any test can fit in, we somehow would merge the whole LTP... I definitely don't object more tests, I am just wondering if we should put it to tools/testing/selftests/ or host it somewhere else.
