From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Pawel Staszewski <pstaszewski@artcom.pl>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc7-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.24
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:33:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080328203314.GC26555@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080328173642.GG32200@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi>
* Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> wrote:
> But that was one year ago when we had only half as many regressions
> per release as they do now, with 2.6.25 we had a peak of 66 pending
> regressions...
we have twice as many commits, and we have better test coverage. I get
the impression that user trust is coming back as well: regressions are
being reported sooner and more persistently - because we are handling
them in a more structured and more dependable way. We also seem to have
more users of latest -git.
so it _appears_ to be an increase in bugginess but i believe it's an
increase of activity and it's all good IMO, we close 90% of the
regressions within a week or two, and most of the regressions are for
obscure cases.
I had 2.6.25 running on most of my boxes from -rc1 on without any
unprovoked crash. (provoked bugs were another matter) Bisection became
more practical and more widespread as well. And i periodically find bugs
that came from ancient kernels so we are fixing bugs faster than we put
them in i think. I didnt have that feeling in the .18-.19 kernels.
also, now that the kerneloops.org client is in Fedora 9 by default,
we'll start to have really objective long-term statistics about how our
users react to the bugs we put into the kernel.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-28 20:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-27 22:53 2.6.25-rc7-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.24 Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 0:18 ` Carlos R. Mafra
2008-03-28 0:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 2:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 3:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 4:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 10:48 ` Paweł Staszewski
2008-03-28 17:46 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-28 21:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 17:15 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-03-28 17:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 18:08 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-03-28 18:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 18:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 18:47 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-28 18:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 19:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 19:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 19:59 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-03-28 20:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 18:37 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 19:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 18:33 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 19:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-29 20:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-29 21:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-29 23:52 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-03-31 18:56 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-31 18:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 3:31 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-03-31 10:14 ` Kamalesh Babulal
2008-03-31 12:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 11:29 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-03-28 16:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 16:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 16:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 17:36 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-03-28 20:33 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-03-28 22:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-31 13:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-28 10:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-28 10:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-28 11:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-03-28 11:13 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-03-28 11:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-28 11:31 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-03-28 16:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 17:06 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-03-28 20:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-28 22:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 11:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-03-28 16:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 16:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-28 18:57 ` Mark Lord
2008-03-28 22:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080328203314.GC26555@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=protasnb@gmail.com \
--cc=pstaszewski@artcom.pl \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.