Re: regression tracking (Re: Linux 2.6.21)

Stefan Richter
2007-06-16T12:24:47Z

Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
[...]
>> This means going through every single point in the regression list
>> asking "Have we tried everything possible to solve this regression?".
[...]
>> And a low hanging fruit to improve the release would be if you could
>> release one last -rc, wait for 48 hours, and then release either this
>> -rc unchanged as -final or another -rc (and wait another 48 hours).
>> There were at least two different regressions people ran into in 2.6.21
>> who successfully tested -rc7.
>
> What about Linus' tree is a development tree, Andrew's one is a "crazy
> development one" (quoting Linus)?
[...]

Linus also said that Andrew's tree is abused too often for broken stuff.

My goal for the little driver subsystem I'm maintaining is
- everything that Andrew pulls from me builds and runs and doesn't
introduce regressions to my and the submitters' knowledge. I am
slowly expanding my test procedures to catch things that fail that
goal.
- Everything that Linus pulls from me fulfills the above criteria
and, in addition, had reasonable time and publication for test and
review, depending on the kind of patch.

I had a few regressions in Linus' releases. None of them were known
before release. All of them were debugged and fixed rather soon after
report, AFAIR.

So what _I_ need is neither better regression tracking nor more manpower
for debugging of regression reports. What I need is more own spare time
and equipment for tests, more own knowledge and experience, and more
people who run-time test -rc kernels or at least my subsystem updates on
top of older kernels.

(Note, I'm talking only about regressions here, not old bugs.
There my requirements are different; the by far most important
one is more manpower for debugging and fixing.)

Well, if _other_ subsystems would get regressions in Linus' tree fixed
quicker, there might perhaps be more people who would consider to run
-rc kernels and would catch and report "my" regressions.

[Oleg, sorry that I too digressed from the subject of your thread, but
your remark about "[crazy] development tree"s caught my eye. IMO people
should care for quality already in Andrew's tree --- more so than at the
moment.]

[Adrian, I'm not saying "too few users run -rc kernels", I'm saying "too
few FireWire driver users run -rc kernels".]
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== -==- =----