Skip to content

docs(arm64): restructure parity tracking by tests unblocked#150

Merged
ryanbreen merged 1 commit intomainfrom
docs/parity-priority-restructure
Feb 4, 2026
Merged

docs(arm64): restructure parity tracking by tests unblocked#150
ryanbreen merged 1 commit intomainfrom
docs/parity-priority-restructure

Conversation

@ryanbreen
Copy link
Owner

Summary

Reorganize the ARM64 parity document to prioritize work based on "what unblocks the largest number of tests" principle.

Changes

Test Inventory Comparison

Category x86-64 ARM64 Gap
Kernel Test Framework 91 91* 0*
Userspace Test Binaries 122 100 -22
Rust Integration Tests 72 2 -70
Total 285 193 -92

New Priority Structure (by tests unblocked)

Priority Work Item Tests Unblocked Cumulative
P1 Port Rust integration tests +70 70
P2 Port x86-64 asm tests to libbreenix +12 82
P3 Fix signal delivery +5 87
P4 Fix remaining failures +25 112
P5 Kernel test framework +91 203

Also Updated

  • Marked argc/argv and COW syscalls as complete
  • Added detailed breakdown of which tests need porting
  • Included cumulative impact tracking

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Reorganize the ARM64 parity document to prioritize work based on
"what unblocks the largest number of tests" principle.

Key changes:
- Add comprehensive test inventory comparison (x86-64: 285, ARM64: 193)
- Restructure priorities by impact:
  - P1: Port Rust integration tests (+70 tests)
  - P2: Port x86-64 asm tests to libbreenix (+12 tests)
  - P3: Fix signal delivery (+5 tests)
  - P4: Remaining userspace failures (+25 tests)
  - P5: Kernel test framework verification (+91 tests)
- Add detailed breakdown of which tests need porting
- Include test gap summary table with cumulative counts
- Update status of completed fixes (argc/argv, COW syscalls)

Total potential improvement: from 50 passing to 203+ tests.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@ryanbreen ryanbreen merged commit 0313fae into main Feb 4, 2026
@ryanbreen ryanbreen deleted the docs/parity-priority-restructure branch February 4, 2026 10:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant