linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

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:	Wed, 14 Nov 2007 08:27:15 +0100
From:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
To:	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
Cc:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@...il.com>, Mark Lord <liml@....ca>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, protasnb@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pcmcia@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-input@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 05:39:45PM -0700, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 November 2007 10:56, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:13:56PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 04:52:32PM +0100, Benoit Boissinot wrote:
> > > > Btw, I used to test every -mm kernel. But since I've switched distros
> > > > (gentoo->ubuntu)
> > > > and I have less time, I feel it's harder to test -rc or -mm kernels (I
> > > > know this isn't a lkml problem
> > > > but more a distro problem, but I would love having an ubuntu blessed
> > > > repo with current dev kernel
> > > > for the latest stable ubuntu release).
> > >
> > > There are two parts to this.  One is a Ubuntu development kernel which
> > > we can give to large numbers of people to expand our testing pool.
> > > But if we don't do a better job of responding to bug reports that
> > > would be generated by expanded testing this won't necessarily help us.
> > >...
> >
> > The main problem aren't missing testers [1] - we already have relatively
> > experienced people testing kernels and/or reporting bugs, and we slowly
> > scare them away due to the many bug reports without any reaction.
> >
> > The main problem is finding experienced developers who spend time on
> > looking into bug reports.
> >
> > Getting many relatively unexperienced users (who need more guidance for
> > debugging issues) as additional testers is therefore IMHO not
> > necessarily a good idea.
> 
> And where experienced developrs are coming from?
> They are not born with Linux kernel skills.
> They grow up from within user base.
> 
> Bigger user base -> more developers (eventually)

You missed the following in my email:
"we slowly scare them away due to the many bug reports without any 
 reaction."

The problem is that bug reports take time. If you go away from easy 
things like compile errors then even things like describing what does
no longer work, ideally producing a scenario where you can reproduce it 
and verifying whether it was present in previous kernels can easily take 
many hours that are spent before the initial bug report.

If the bug report then gets ignored we discourage the person who sent 
the bug report to do any work related to the kernel again.

> vda

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/