From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932972Ab2CZQrZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:47:25 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]:60348 "EHLO mail-wi0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932948Ab2CZQrW convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:47:22 -0400 From: Maciej Rutecki Reply-To: maciej.rutecki@gmail.com To: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: Tracking regressions for next release(s) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:47:17 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.3.0; KDE/4.7.4; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , florian@mickler.org, Bjorn Helgaas References: <20120323101431.GA8832@liondog.tnic> In-Reply-To: <20120323101431.GA8832@liondog.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Message-Id: <201203261847.17521.maciej.rutecki@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On piątek, 23 marca 2012 o 11:14:31 Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 07:01:19AM +0100, Maciej Rutecki wrote: > > I am interested in the opinion of the developers, testers, and > > everyone involved in the development of the kernel, if they thing that > > tracking regressions and monitoring the quality makes sense, > > Absolutely. > > > especially since I met several times (put it mildly) dislike of such > > work and the bugs are repaired relatively slowly. > > I can imagine people getting cranky when someone points out that there's > a "boring" bug they need to fix instead of them working on the cool new > feature they have thought of. It is the same old story we've been having > since forever: people don't really love to fix bugs, especially if the > code works for them and the bug doesn't appear on their boxes. > > > Perhaps someone has comments or proposals for change (in the way of > > work or me). > > Yeah, we need a big bad assh*le :) who screams at everyone until their > bugs is fixed. > > But serioulsy, this hasn't changed: we definitely need a regression > list, I think it works even better when Linus goes over it and says > this is fixed, that is this commit, etc. because he pulls all the trees > in the end, ... so yeah, I think what you guys are doing is good and > important. > > It would be even cooler if this list be expanded also to regressions in > kernel performance which people have noticed from running benchmarks on > different -rcs and have noticed differences there, maybe a website (not > bugzilla) which lists all those regressions for interested parties to > fix in addition to the LKML mails..., etc... > > Thanks for your hard work, btw. Borislav, Bjorn Helgaas: thank you for the answer, but observing the reactions I get the impression that tracking the regression is not likely anyone's interest. In addition - especially on the last release cycle - sometimes encountered difficulties in cooperation on this topic with developers: ignoring request to update the status of the regression, or even add your e- mail to bugzilla. I give up tracking the regression, but not the kernel testing. Even now I have a few hours per week more for it. Regards -- Maciej Rutecki http://www.mrutecki.pl