On Thu 2017-09-07 10:07:09, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > Hm, just as background, there are no regression reports I'm aware of > > > against any of these trees, plus most of the dangerous commits have > > > been in linux-next for at least two weeks - the majority of them even > > > longer. The last 2-4 commits of x86/mm are fresher. > > > > Side note: I do not believe a lot of people actually run linux-next on > > laptops, so suspend/resume likely doesn't get a lot of testing in > > next. > > > > I think most people who run linux-next tend to be automation things on farms. > > Yeah, so 10af6235e0d3 was in linux-next for over a month, yet no-one reported the > bug. > > > Don't get me wrong - I love linux-next and your tip testing, but I > > think linux-next is best for finding build errors etc big integration > > issues, with some very rudimentary actual boot checking. > > > > Maybe I'm wrong. > > I don't think you are wrong - most boot tests don't involve laptops. linux-next is > mostly server oriented - and servers are often more debuggable than laptops. (Have > actual serial ports or physical network connections with serial emulation, etc.) > > I tried to maintain a laptop testbox in -tip testing with netconsole for a time - > but it was quite a bit of pain so I eventually dropped it. (Not that the simple > boot + kernel build test that -tip does would have uncovered this particular bug.) Some time ago, Tony Lindgren asked me to test Nokia N900 on -next from time to time. I do, and it uncovers problems from time to time. Perhaps if Linus or you asks for a volunteer, they can get one? We have people submitting patches due to various challenges, perhaps "run -next for a month" would be suitable challenge? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html