New test ideas
Try to keep the tests in categories as shown below.
general system sanity [edit section]
Here are some tests that are good for general system sanity:- LTP system call test (already in Fuego)
- LTP posix test suite (already in Fuego)
- LSB-FHS - Linux Standard Base Filesystem Hierarchy Standard test
filesystem [edit section]
xfstests [edit section]
xfstests seems to be the new standard for measuring Linux file system performance. We should include this test in fuego.See the following for more information:
- https://git.kernel.org/cgit/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/
- clone with 'git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git'
- I think this is the main upstream repository for xfstests (the repository at http://oss.sgi.com/ has been deprecated)
- An automated xfstests infrastructure using kvm
- Ted Ts'o's work on automating xfstests
- Toward better testing
- Dave Chimmer's report on the status of xfstests at an event in 2014
block layer performance measurement [edit section]
Possibly something simple like 'time dd ...' is useful for catching some things (and it's short).Here is a post from Linus Walleij about using a simple dd to measure block layer performance. He found a regression of performance using the MQ block layer scheduler, using this.
I got blk-mq running for MMC/SD today and I see a gross performance regression, from 37 MB/s to 27 MB/s on Ux500 7.38 GB eMMC with a simple dd test: BEFORE switching to MQ: time dd if=/dev/mmcblk3 of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1024 1073741824 bytes (1.0GB) copied, 27.530335 seconds, 37.2MB/s real 0m 27.54s user 0m 0.02s sys 0m 7.56s AFTER switching to MQ: time dd if=/dev/mmcblk3 of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1024 1073741824 bytes (1.0GB) copied, 37.170990 seconds, 27.5MB/s real 0m 37.18s user 0m 0.02s sys 0m 7.32s I will however post my hacky patch as a RFD to the blockdevs and the block maintainers, along with the numbers and a speculation about what may be causing it. asynchronous requests (request pipelining) is one thing, another thing is front/back merge in the block layer I guess.
Bus testing [edit section]
CAN bus testing [edit section]
From agl-discussions list Dec 13: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/automotive-discussions/2016-December/003056.htmlI'm interested your benchmark amb can data. http://docs.automotivelinux.org/docs/apis_services/en/dev/reference/iotbzh2016/signaling/AGL-AppFW-CAN-Signaling-Benchmark.pdf
I want to test amb d-bus can data benchmark, So can you share your used "can data" and "amd configuration" ?
This test apparently has a CAN packet injector, written by Cogent.
year 2038 test [edit section]
Arnd Bergmann is a leading kernel expert on this topic. He gave a talk at Linaro Connect 2017 in Budapest. See his session at: http://connect.linaro.org/resource/bud17/bud17-512/ and an lwn.net report on it here: https://lwn.net/Articles/717076/There's a page with some very small test snippets at: http://maul.deepsky.com/~merovech/2038.html
kernel tests [edit section]
kselftest [edit section]
kernelci [edit section]
- build test
- boot test
all 0day tests [edit section]
Figure out a way to run all existing 0day tests.