linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/31] implement atomic_fetch

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 23 Apr 2016 11:23:41 +0800
From:	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
To:	Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...nel.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, will.deacon@....com,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
	waiman.long@....com, fweisbec@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	rth@...ddle.net, vgupta@...opsys.com, linux@....linux.org.uk,
	egtvedt@...fundet.no, realmz6@...il.com,
	ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp, rkuo@...eaurora.org,
	tony.luck@...el.com, geert@...ux-m68k.org, james.hogan@...tec.com,
	ralf@...ux-mips.org, dhowells@...hat.com, jejb@...isc-linux.org,
	mpe@...erman.id.au, schwidefsky@...ibm.com, dalias@...c.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, cmetcalf@...lanox.com, jcmvbkbc@...il.com,
	arnd@...db.de, dbueso@...e.de
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/31] implement atomic_fetch_$op

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 09:35:06PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com> writes:
> 
> >> OK, weirdness. I received the "BUILD SUCCESS" email without any arm64
> >> builds listed, but I just received a build bot email telling me the
> >> arm64 build was borked (which I know it is).
> >
> > Sorry, that may happen because even though most errors will be
> > detected in the first hour or before the BUILD SUCCESS/DONE
> > notification, the build/boot/performance tests for a particular branch
> > may continue for days, during the time test coverage keeps growing.
> > Which means it's possible to receive a build failure after receiving
> > BUILD SUCCESS notification.
> >
> > In particular, 0-day bot classify 500+ kconfigs into 2 priority lists:
> >
> > P1: 100+ realtime priority kconfigs which should be finished before sending
> >     out BUILD SUCCESS notification
> >
> > P2: 400+ background priority kconfigs which may take hours to days to finish
> >
> > That split is a tradeoff between timeliness and completeness. It turns
> > out to work well as long as we choose the suitable P1 list.
> >
> > So the more accurate interpretation of "BUILD SUCCESS/DONE" would be:
> > 0day bot is working on your tree (no worry about out-of-service) and
> > reached a major milestone.
> 
> Thanks, this is very useful information. But would it be also possible
> to get a report about the P2 completion (or failure)?

Good question! I'm not sure people would care (or even be confused)
about a report that arrive after days, however based on some statistic
data we may find the suitable time to wait for possible error reports.

The past reports show that about 60% errors are reported in 2 hours,
90% errors are reported in 24 hours and there are 1% errors reported
after 1 week.

So developers may reasonably wait for 1 day before sending out patches.

Thanks,
Fengguang