From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764532AbYD3XMW (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:12:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758505AbYD3XMN (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:12:13 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:33238 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752076AbYD3XMM (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:12:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:11:30 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Mariusz Kozlowski Cc: dpn@isomerica.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, rjw@sisk.pl, davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jirislaby@gmail.com Subject: Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! Message-Id: <20080430161130.4328b830.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <200805010053.31894.m.kozlowski@tuxland.pl> References: <20080429.190352.137408408.davem@davemloft.net> <4818DAC4.0@isomerica.net> <20080430135938.82e46e67.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <200805010053.31894.m.kozlowski@tuxland.pl> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 1 May 2008 00:53:31 +0200 Mariusz Kozlowski wrote: > Hello, > > > > Perhaps we should be clear and simple about what potential testers > > > should be running at any given point in time. With -mm, linux-next, > > > linux-2.6, etc, as a newcomer I find it difficult to know where my > > > testing time and energy is best directed. > > Speaking of energy and time of a tester. I'd like to know where these resources > should be directed from the arch point of view. Once I had a plan to buy as > many arches as I could get and run a farm of test boxes 8-) But that's hard > because of various reasons (money, time, room, energy). What arches need more > attention? Which are forgotten? Which are going away? For example does buying > an alphaserver DS 20 (hey - it's cheap) and running tests on it makes sense > these days? > gee. I think to a large extent this problem solves itself - the "more important" architectures have more people using them, so they get more testing and more immediate testing. However there are gaps. I'd say that arm is one of the more important architectures, but many people who are interested in arm tend to shy away from bleeding-edge kernels for various reasons. Mainly because they have real products to get out the door, rather than dinking around with mainline kernel developement. So testing bleeding-edge on some arm systems would be good, I expect. otoh, the platform we break most often is surely plain-old-PCs. If it's bugs you're looking for, I expect that dumpster-diving for as many different PCs as you can and trying to get them to boot (let alone suspend and resume!) would keep you entertained ;)