Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)

Daniel Walker
2007-08-27T16:20:54Z

On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 18:09 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 05:41:17AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> >> What I'm concerned about is that regressions which we didn't fix are just
> >> getting lost. Is anyone taking care to ensure that they are getting
> >> transitioned into bugzilla for tracking?
> >
> > Maybe this was a dumb assumption on my part, but I thought regressions were
> > getting rolled over into the next release's list, if they are not solved?
>
> Judging from the regression lists and the regression reports we get
> post-release both on lkml and in the kernel Bugzilla we have much more
> than 100 unfixed regressions since 2.6.20 (plus regressions from older
> kernels...).
>
> Tracking that many regressions is one problem (although getting all bug
> reports in Bugzilla would make this quite easy), but the bigger problem
> is how to get them debugged and resolved.

Maximize the shame right? Post summaries of the regressions to LKML so
that everyone knows about the regression list, and what was broken and
who broke it ..

Daniel