4 ms·
> upstreaming it is considered extremely good are we assuming some sort of automatic testing will be added? unit testing? integration testing? sounds super har
by MuffinFlavored 4y ago
> upstreaming it is considered extremely good
are we assuming some sort of automatic testing will be added? unit testing? integration testing? sounds super hard to do for a driver. but... high quality code just being merged into master can still have bugs introduced in the future on accident, right? it's tests that usually makes it safe?
- rsaxvc 4y agoYou can run these sorts of tests in a VM with PCIe passthrough.
- djbusby 4y agoAnd hardware companies usually have large test-beds of hardware. So, Nvidia should be able to build a comprehensive test-suite.
- MuffinFlavored 4y agothe same way they should have been able to build an upstreamable opensource driver all this time, right? lol
- djbusby 4y agoNo. Cause one (hardware) is old-hat and the other (FOSS) is big and risky and scary.
- loganberries 4y agoThe kernel has bugs, all software has bugs. But there are massive massive test suites run by hundreds of companies on linux-next. If you email off a stack of patches that breaks something, chances are you'll get emails back telling you which patch had the breaking change in.
- jsjohnst 4y agoThe reason upstreaming it is considered extremely good really doesn’t have to do with unit testing or really exactly with testing at all. The issue, as stated eloquently by the parent of your post, is that without it being upstreamed, it’s Nvidia’s problem to fix any issues caused by one of their dependencies in the kernel changing, where as if it’s upstreamed, it’s only maybe partially their responsibility (main burden is on whoever changed the dependency).