Recruiting Help in Smashing Kernel Bugs?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Recruiting Help in Smashing Kernel Bugs?

Posted by Cliff on Wednesday October 30, 2002 @12:24AM from the more-eyes-less-bugs dept.

Orm asks: "As we all know, Linux version 3.0 (or 2.6) is about to get a feature freeze, meaning that it is bug hunting time. And as we saw on the kernel-summit, some people are afraid that not enough people are willing to try this new kernel, to help get those bugs smashed. My idea to get more people into this hunting, is to write a good paper on how to do it. Not a standard 'how to locate and fix bugs' but a document targeted towards people using 2.4.x today, who will want to help out. So what things should one need to know when testing a new kernel?"

"First: What is new? When I am running menuconfig/xconfig, is there something new I should look into? Will the old /dev directory be replaced with the new devfs-magic?

Second: What needs testing? I guess this is hand in hand with what is new, but you never know. The non-kernel-dev people may not know everything that has happened since 2.4.x., and there may be particular features that should be focused on more than others.

Finally: How do we do it? How should we test? What are the best ways to localize the bugs? How should we write a bug report? Whom should we send it to?

You do want our help, don't you?

I do hope to see this document at the same time as the feature-freeze. I also hope it will be a well-written piece, so many will feel the 'urge' to test the new kernel and give good feedback."

10 of 22 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:2.5.44 doesn't compile for me... by battjt · 2002-10-30 00:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

Ditto.

I can't test software when the basics fail. I've not gotten 2.5.* to compile for even my most basic setup.

Features that are known to fail (obviously if they don't compile) should not be sent to testing.

Joe

--
Joe Batt Solid Design
Re:2.5.44 doesn't compile for me... by psavo · 2002-10-30 00:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

well, then that's your bug-testing. report compilation failure. heck, make oldconfig debians .config, and send all failed things.

--
fucktard is a tenderhearted description
Cover the basics first by Sherloqq · 2002-10-30 01:10 · Score: 4, Interesting

1. Make sure software compiles! (judging from some replies, even that can't be taken for granted...)
2. Make sure software runs! (ditto)
3. Make sure all the functionality you expect from the kernel is there (i.e. if you compiled a driver for a network card, it better work and be backwards compatible, unless it's not supposed to anymore)
4. Make sure the software is stable (test the bejeezus out of the features -- if your cdrom or a scsi card requires a particular setting to work, or there are three ways for you to reference a device, test all of them (or at least the ones you care about)
5. If you encounter any bugs (related or unrelated), report them in enough detail for them to be reproducible. Keep it to the point and relevant to the topic. Use spell and grammar checkers :)
6. When updates/bugfixes come out, lather, rinse, repeat.

--
Have EVDO, will travel.
Re:2.5.44 doesn't compile for me... by pruneau · 2002-10-30 01:42 · Score: 5, Informative

Me too !
The problem is that it's not a easy-to-track down feature into a remote far-not-likely-to-be-used-anyway-freaking-mysterio us-device-driver. No, it's something into the basic kernel code (/usr/src/linux/kernel/ or /usr/src/linux/include/linux).
I know enough of C/compilation to locate the problem and even attempt to quick-patch it, but I do not have the knowledge (nor the time, I'm afraid) to correct that and submit a patch by myself.
The point is, short of posting that on the kernel mailing list (which maybe I should do), is there a better way to get around that ? I'm quite willing to help, drat I tested about 7 to 10 .config file before giving up, but what in hell can I do !?!
I mean I know, the open-source model is suppose to work in a way where I should try hard to figure things out, but hey, if they want a broad testing audience, they cannot force everybody to learn the kernel.
There should be a middle ground here, should'nt it ???

--
[Pruneau /\o^O/\ warranty void if this .sig is removed]
Testing 2.5. by heikkih · 2002-10-30 01:49 · Score: 4, Informative

How about checking out Dave Jones' introduction to 2.5? :) It will probably be updated as things move along, most notably is LVM2 already included.
Whats critical for me... by crazney · 2002-10-30 02:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

I had 2.5.34 or something compiled and going. But unfortunatly I wasn't savy enough to hack the nvidia interface to compile against it. So I went back to 2.4

Maybe if one of the kernel hackers could spend an hour or so getting the nvidia drivers to compile without unresolved symbols, itd open the door up to alot of power gaming users and developers (eg myself).

Even though the NVidia drivers don't come with source, there is one source file which is what gets compiled against the kernel - I got as far as getting it to compile, but unfortunatly since the device module interface has changed somewhat there were unresolved symbols that I didn't know howto fix (though all the unresolved symbols where imported from the source file - so it is fixable).

craz

--
stuff
1. Re:Whats critical for me... by 4of12 · 2002-10-30 02:50 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  NVidia.There's a love-hate thing.
  
  I've got a Linux box with an nVidia binary driver that I use at work that's 99.9% great under 2.4.
  
  Functionally, it's a great thing.
  
  But I always see the same old exchange on the kernel mailing lists, as people can't get new kernels to work with the binary driver.
  
  Then, someone like Alan Cox usually replies tersely that since they can't see the code for nVidia driver, that they can't help fix the problem. The kernel developers are looking at a black wall.
  
  Meanwhile, I think the nVidia folks use code in their drivers that is encumbered by patents, NDA's , competitive advantage, so they simply won't release the code for the binary driver.
  
  A stand-off, I guess. As long as folks at NVidia update their drivers I'll be fat and happy. If ever they don't, I'm totally hosed.
  
  So: are the GPL'd nVidia drivers any good?
  
  --
  "Provided by the management for your protection."
2. Re:Whats critical for me... by SpaceLifeForm · 2002-10-30 03:37 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You can follow what's going one without filling up your inbox here.
  
  --
  You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
Bug tracker for the kernel by FattMattP · 2002-10-30 04:42 · Score: 3

Where does one go to see the list of open bugs for the kernel or to file a big report? Is there a bugzilla for the kernel?

--
Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
Tried Kernel Traffic/Kernel Cousins? by Chris+Pimlott · 2002-10-30 05:40 · Score: 3, Informative

Kernel Traffic is an excellent site that puts out 'issues' summarizing the major topics on linux-kernel. It's quite handy. There are also a few 'Kernel Cousins' covering other projects, including Wine.