linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.14 015/161] printk: Add console owner and waiter logic to load balance console writes

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: <20180416124711.048f1858@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:47:11 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>
Cc:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.14 015/161] printk: Add console owner and
 waiter logic to load balance console writes

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:31:09 +0000
Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 12:22:44PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:14:15 +0000
> >Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com> wrote:
> >  
> >> Since the rate we're seeing now with AUTOSEL is similar to what we were
> >> seeing before AUTOSEL, what's the problem it's causing?  
> >
> >Does that mean we just doubled the rate of regressions? That's the
> >problem.  
> 
> No, the rate stayed the same :)
> 
> If before ~2% of stable commits were buggy, this is still the case with
> AUTOSEL.

Sorry, I didn't mean "rate" I meant "number". If the rate stayed the
same, that means the number increased.

> 
> >>
> >> How do you know if a bug bothers someone?
> >>
> >> If a user is annoyed by a LED issue, is he expected to triage the bug,
> >> report it on LKML and patiently wait for the appropriate patch to be
> >> backported?  
> >
> >Yes.  
> 
> I'm honestly not sure how to respond.
> 
> Let me ask my wife (who is happy using Linux as a regular desktop user)
> how comfortable she would be with triaging kernel bugs...

That's really up to the distribution, not the main kernel stable. Does
she download and compile the kernels herself? Does she use LEDs?

The point is, stable is to keep what was working continued working.
If we don't care about introducing a regression, and just want to keep
regressions the same as mainline, why not just go to mainline? That way
you can also get the new features? Mainline already has the mantra to
not break user space. When I work on new features, I sometimes stumble
on bugs with the current features. And some of those fixes require a
rewrite. It was "good enough" before, but every so often could cause a
bug that the new feature would trigger more often. Do we back port that
rewrite? Do we backport fixes to old code that are more likely to be
triggered by new features?

Ideally, we should be working on getting to no regressions to stable.

-- Steve