All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Mark Goodwin <markgw@sgi.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] XFS: Use the inode tree for finding dirty inodes
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:18:32 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080723041832.GH5947@disturbed> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <488692FB.1010101@sgi.com>

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:10:03PM +1000, Mark Goodwin wrote:
>
>
> Dave Chinner wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 03:27:33AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> ...
>>> I only fear
>>> we'll never get it in with the current review and commit latencies
>>> for XFS :(
>>
>> I can see this being a big issue in the not-too-distant future.....
>
> [getting off-topic for this thread, but anyway ..]
> This is already a big issue, obviously, and has been for some time.
>
> Internally, we're attempting to refine our patch acceptance processes,
> (e.g. gitify our internal dev tree and mirror it on oss so it's much
> easier to push back out to oss). But the QA overhead remains a stubborn
> problem. I think we're going to have to ask for QA tests (both regression
> and performance) to be written as part of the patch acceptance policy -
> under this policy, merely passing existing QA will not be sufficient.
> Comments?

In general - unnecessary because most changes submitted don't
change behaviour or interfaces or that subsystem/behaviour
is already tested by the QA suite. For new features with externally
visable interfaces (the rare case) then requiring new tests is
just fine.

In reality - the community will route around SGI and go straight
to Andrew or Linus if this proves to be a burden.

Passing XFSQA is a significant indication that the change is as good
as the developer can do in their own environment; if it passes
review then at that point it needs wider QA, and that comes from
committing to *public repositories* so that and varied workloads and
machines stress the code.

If QA is a burden, it's because you're not allowing the wider
community easy access to the dev code to test at an early
stage. A dev tree is *meant to break*, it's not a prodution
environment. Gett eh code out there early and distribute the
QA workload, don't make it a burden on the developers or
a bottleneck to getting code accepted.

> We have recently set up external access to a system for QA and
> regression testing for Christoph's use .. perhaps that should
> be a permanent offering?

Yes.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-07-23  4:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-07-20 12:19 [PATCH 0/4] XFS: replace the mount inode list with radix tree traversals Dave Chinner
2008-07-20 12:19 ` [PATCH 1/4] XFS: Remove xfs_iflush_all and clean up xfs_finish_reclaim_all() Dave Chinner
2008-07-21  7:58   ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-07-21 11:33     ` Dave Chinner
2008-07-22  4:24       ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-07-20 12:19 ` [PATCH 2/4] XFS: Use the inode tree for finding dirty inodes Dave Chinner
2008-07-22  4:28   ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-07-22  5:30     ` Dave Chinner
2008-07-22  7:27       ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-07-23  0:05         ` Dave Chinner
2008-07-23  2:10           ` Mark Goodwin
2008-07-23  3:46             ` Eric Sandeen
2008-07-23  4:04               ` Mark Goodwin
2008-07-23  4:09                 ` Eric Sandeen
2008-07-23  5:00                   ` Mark Goodwin
2008-07-23  4:27                 ` Dave Chinner
2008-07-23  4:18             ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2008-07-23 15:37             ` Russell Cattelan
2008-07-24  6:02               ` Mark Goodwin
2008-07-25  3:55                 ` Russell Cattelan
2008-07-25  4:08                   ` Mark Goodwin
2008-07-25  5:40                     ` Russell Cattelan
2008-07-25  6:55                   ` Niv Sardi
2008-07-23 20:49             ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-07-24 11:46               ` Dave Chinner
2008-07-20 12:19 ` [PATCH 3/4] XFS: Traverse inode trees when releasing dquots Dave Chinner
2008-07-20 12:19 ` [PATCH 4/4] XFS: remove the mount inode list Dave Chinner
2008-07-22  4:29   ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-07-22  5:42     ` Dave Chinner

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=20080723041832.GH5947@disturbed \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=markgw@sgi.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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.