From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757098Ab2FPNcc (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2012 09:32:32 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:59741 "EHLO mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750930Ab2FPNca (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2012 09:32:30 -0400 Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 15:32:25 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Greg KH , ksummit-2012-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org, LKML Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND or not ATTEND] That's the question! Message-ID: <20120616133221.GA31570@somewhere> References: <20120615233413.GB8894@kroah.com> <20120616072906.7469ec24@tpl.lwn.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120616072906.7469ec24@tpl.lwn.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 07:29:06AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:50:05 +0200 (CEST) > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > A good start would be if you could convert your kernel statistics into > > accounting the consolidation effects of contributions instead of > > fostering the idiocy that corporates have started to measure themself > > and the performance of their employees (I'm not kidding, it's the sad > > reality) with line and commit count statistics. > > I would dearly love to come up with a way to measure "real work" in > some fashion; I've just not, yet, figured out how to do that. I do > fear that the simple numbers we're able to generate end up creating the > wrong kinds of incentives. > > Any thoughts on how to measure "consolidation effects"? I toss out > numbers on code removal sometimes, but that turns out to not be a whole > lot more useful than anything else on its own. I fear there is no reliable automated way to measure that :)