[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170207000229.6h7pagtv5j3ksdac@pd.tnic>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 01:02:29 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Subject: Re: Regression on next-20170203 spi/for-next 3f87493930a0f qemu on
x86_64
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 06:47:43PM +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Do we have any test units which can kick off regularly to test against
> such type of regression in the future or is it not worth it?
Yap, it is called: build new kernel and boot it the box :-)
I always try to build and boot all -rcs and tip/master on my boxes and I
do catch a couple of issues almost every week this way.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists