linux-kernel - Let me know about regressions in 4.7 (was: Re: Linux 4.7-rc1)

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: <61cc8090-40be-1adc-8047-306115668afb@leemhuis.info>
Date:	Fri, 3 Jun 2016 07:34:47 +0200
From:	Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Let me know about regressions in 4.7 (was: Re: Linux 4.7-rc1)

On 29.05.2016 19:00, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> […] Anyway, enough blathering. Go out and test. […]

And if you find any regressions in 4.7 pre-releases let me know via
regressions@...mhuis.info I'll try to compile them into a list and post
it on LKML once a week similar to how Rafael did it until a few years
ago. My plan is to do it for 4.7 and maybe 4.8. Don't expect me to do it
for the next few years or so, as I fear kernel regression tracking
might turn out to be quite a lot of work -- and it's work I'll be doing
in my spare time for fun, just because I think someone should do it.

I'll keep my eyes open on LKML and will run a bugzilla query now and
then to find regressions on my own. But you know how it is: it's easy to
miss a mail and there are a few other places where regressions get
reported to, so please forward/bounce them to me or drop me a line if
you see something which should be tracked. Be warned, I also might
encourage users to show up on the right mailing lists to get in contact
with developers that might be responsible for the regression in
question, to hopefully get the regression fixed in the end.

In case you wonder who I am and if I'm capable of doing what I plan to
do: I have some experience with contributing to open source projects,
as I did quite a few things in the Fedora world ten years ago. Apart
from that I earn my money a technical writer that for more than
ten years now watches kernel development quite closely, because I write
about it for a German publishing company. Use your favorite search
engine if you want to know more (for a few years some of the stuff I
wrote was translated to English and published on
http://www.h-online.com/open/). In the end it means: I'm not a
programmer and until now only read LKML, but I think I know quite well
how things work.

Ohh, and if you wonder why I so crazy and just for fun want to do
regression tracking: In the past few years I gave a bunch of talks about
improvements in the latest Linux kernel versions. During or after those
talks quite often someone complained about regressions in the kernel.
People said there were to many of them, complained that regression they
reported were ignored, or found it hard to find the right place to
report regressions.

Cu, knurd

P.S.: BTW for those that run Fedora releases: I maintain a RPM
repository that provides kernel packages build from recent mainline git
snapshots for recent Fedora releases; the latest stable releases are
available there, too. IOW: you can get everything in those repos to
easily run mainline kernels and check for regressions. Find more details
on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Kernel_Vanilla_Repositories