linux-kernel - Re: Tracking regressions for next release(s)

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]

Message-Id: <201203261847.17521.maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:47:17 +0200
From:	Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@...il.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, florian@...kler.org,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: Tracking regressions for next release(s)

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
--
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/