From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Pawel Staszewski <pstaszewski@artcom.pl>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc7-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.24
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:33:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080328203314.GC26555@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080328173642.GG32200@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi>
* Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> wrote:
> But that was one year ago when we had only half as many regressions
> per release as they do now, with 2.6.25 we had a peak of 66 pending
> regressions...
we have twice as many commits, and we have better test coverage. I get
the impression that user trust is coming back as well: regressions are
being reported sooner and more persistently - because we are handling
them in a more structured and more dependable way. We also seem to have
more users of latest -git.
so it _appears_ to be an increase in bugginess but i believe it's an
increase of activity and it's all good IMO, we close 90% of the
regressions within a week or two, and most of the regressions are for
obscure cases.
I had 2.6.25 running on most of my boxes from -rc1 on without any
unprovoked crash. (provoked bugs were another matter) Bisection became
more practical and more widespread as well. And i periodically find bugs
that came from ancient kernels so we are fixing bugs faster than we put
them in i think. I didnt have that feeling in the .18-.19 kernels.
also, now that the kerneloops.org client is in Fedora 9 by default,
we'll start to have really objective long-term statistics about how our
users react to the bugs we put into the kernel.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-28 20:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-27 22:53 2.6.25-rc7-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.24 Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 0:18 ` Carlos R. Mafra
2008-03-28 0:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 2:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 3:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 4:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 10:48 ` Paweł Staszewski
2008-03-28 17:46 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-28 21:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 17:15 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-03-28 17:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 18:08 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-03-28 18:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 18:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 18:47 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-28 18:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 19:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 19:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 19:59 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-03-28 20:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 18:37 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 19:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 18:33 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 19:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-29 20:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-29 21:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-29 23:52 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-03-31 18:56 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-31 18:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-03-28 3:31 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-03-31 10:14 ` Kamalesh Babulal
2008-03-31 12:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 11:29 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-03-28 16:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 16:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 16:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-03-28 17:36 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-03-28 20:33 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-03-28 22:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-31 13:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-28 10:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-28 10:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-28 11:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-03-28 11:13 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-03-28 11:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-28 11:31 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-03-28 16:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 17:06 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-03-28 20:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-28 22:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 11:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-03-28 16:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-28 16:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-28 18:57 ` Mark Lord
2008-03-28 22:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20080328203314.GC26555@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=protasnb@gmail.com \
--cc=pstaszewski@artcom.pl \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox