Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs fixes for 6.12-rc2

Jann Horn
2024-10-07T23:34:10Z

On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 9:29 PM Kent Overstreet
<kent.overstreet@linux.dev> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 06, 2024 at 12:04:45PM GMT, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > But build and boot testing? All those random configs, all those odd
> > architectures, and all those odd compilers *do* affect build testing.
> > So you as a filesystem maintainer should *not* generally strive to do
> > your own basic build test, but very much participate in the generic
> > build test that is being done by various bots (not just on linux-next,
> > but things like the 0day bot on various patch series posted to the
> > list etc).
> >
> > End result: one size does not fit all. But I get unhappy when I see
> > some subsystem that doesn't seem to participate in what I consider the
> > absolute bare minimum.
>
> So the big issue for me has been that with the -next/0day pipeline, I
> have no visibility into when it finishes; which means it has to go onto
> my mental stack of things to watch for and becomes yet another thing to
> pipeline, and the more I have to pipeline the more I lose track of
> things.

FWIW, my understanding is that linux-next is not just infrastructure
for CI bots. For example, there is also tooling based on -next that
doesn't have such a thing as "done with processing" - my understanding
is that syzkaller (https://syzkaller.appspot.com/upstream) has
instances that fuzz linux-next
("ci-upstream-linux-next-kasan-gce-root").