[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071113234033.GL1356@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:40:33 +0000
From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To: Mark Lord <liml@....ca>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-pcmcia@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, protasnb@...il.com,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org,
linux-input@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 03:18:07PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> Russell King wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:08:32AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> >> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> ..
> >>> This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_,
> >>> it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored for
> >>> years, in favor of the all-too-easy "open source means many eyeballs and
> >>> that is our QA" answer, which is a _good_ answer but by far not the most
> >>> intelligent answer! Today "many eyeballs" is simply not good enough and
> >>> nature (and other OS projects) will route us around if we dont change.
> >> ..
> >>
> >> QA-101 and "many eyeballs" are not at all in opposition.
> >> The latter is how we find out about bugs on uncommon hardware,
> >> and the former is what we need to track them and overall quality.
> >>
> >> A HUGE problem I have with current "efforts", is that once someone
> >> reports a bug, the onus seems to be 99% on the *reporter* to find
> >> the exact line of code or commit. Ghad what a repressive method.
> >
> > 99% on the reporter? Is that why I always try to understand the
> > reporters problem (*provided* it's in an area I know about) and come
> > up with a patch to test a theory or fix the issue?
> ..
>
> Same here.
>
> I just find it weird that something can be known broken for several -rc*
> kernels before I happen to install it, discover it's broken on my own machine,
> and then I track it down, fix it, and submit the patch, generally all within a
> couple of hours. Where the heck was the dude(ess) that broke it ?? AWOL.
Same thing can be said for compile breakages as well. Looking at the
latest kautobuild output:
ARM ep93xx defconfig has been broken since 2.6.23-git1 due to:
drivers/net/arm/ep93xx_eth.c:420: error: implicit declaration of function '__netif_rx_schedule_prep'
caused by: [NET]: Make NAPI polling independent of struct net_device objects.
ARM netx defconfig has been broken since 2.6.23-git1 due to:
drivers/net/netx-eth.c: In function 'netx_eth_hard_start_xmit':
drivers/net/netx-eth.c:131: error: 'dev' undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/net/netx-eth.c:131: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
drivers/net/netx-eth.c:131: error: for each function it appears in.)
drivers/net/netx-eth.c: In function 'netx_eth_receive':
drivers/net/netx-eth.c:158: error: 'dev' undeclared (first use in this function)
caused by: [NET] drivers/net: statistics cleanup #1 -- save memory and shrink code
Haven't got a report for either of those, but Kautobuild lets people
know if folk can be bothered to subscribe to its mailing list and/or
look at the site occasionally.
I suspect the maintainers of the above drivers aren't aware that their
drivers are broken.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of:
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists