linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] docs: new text on bisecting which also covers bug validation

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aaf7a195-e726-4bcb-a63a-4e75c09608ef@leemhuis.info>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 13:22:03 +0100
From: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
 <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: regressions@...ts.linux.dev, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
 Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Petr Tesařík
 <petr@...arici.cz>, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>,
 Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] docs: new text on bisecting which also covers bug
 validation

On 03.03.24 16:39, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
> <regressions@...mhuis.info> writes:
> 
>> On 01.03.24 09:41, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> Add a second document on bisecting regressions explaining the whole
>>> process from beginning to end -- while also describing how to validate
>>> if a problem is still present in mainline.  This "two in one" approach
>>> is possible, as checking whenever a bug is in mainline is one of the
>>> first steps before performing a bisection anyway and thus needs to be
>>> described. Due to this approach the text also works quite nicely in
>>> conjunction with Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst, as it
>>> covers all typical cases where users will need to build a kernel in
>>> exactly the same order.
>>> [...]
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst
>>> index ed8a629e59c86a..c53bb6e36291b8 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst
>>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst
>>> @@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
>>> -=================================================
>>
>> Just saw that, that line obviously was not meant to be removed. Sorry.
>>
>> Jonathan, in case you consider merging this "soon", as suggested
>> yesterday by  Vegard, could you please fix this up? Otherwise I'll fix
>> this with v3.
> 
> I've applied the patch and undone the little change, no need for a v3.

Great, thx and thx!

FWIW, I received some feedback from a user who among others also noticed
a bug. Will send a follow-up patch in a few days when the dust settled
and a few details are fully ironed out.

Thx again for merging it. Ciao, Thorsten