[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080414101813.GB14549@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:18:13 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
jesper.juhl@...il.com, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, jeff@...zik.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Reporting bugs and bisection (was: Re: 2.6.25-rc8: FTP
transfer errors)
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> We dont' do that as much nowadays - there's a tendency to
>
> a) throw the problem back at the reporter, often asking them to
> bisect. If the reporter is running a distro kernel (eg: Fedora)
> then that's quite hard, and often isn't a think they have knowledge
> to do. So they'll just disappear. Or
>
> b) just ignore the report altogether.
hm, who does this - i've seen networking folks do it but does anyone
else do it? Such cases are _clear_ abuse of users and they'll do the
obvious thing: vote with their feet.
I only ask people to bisect it when all other avenues fail - and even
then i try to make it clear that bisection is just something they can
_optionally_ do to speed things up (it's never required), and that it's
a pure opt-in.
doing _kernel_ bisection is totally hard at the moment - it disrupts the
user way too much and causes many hours of work for most users. [
Requiring bisection for userspace projects might be more doable. (but
even there's it's wrong when it's not automated completely and where a
failure pattern is not deterministic.) ]
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists