From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261504AbVGWDQM (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:16:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262317AbVGWDQM (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:16:12 -0400 Received: from linuxwireless.org.ve.carpathiahost.net ([66.117.45.234]:9400 "EHLO linuxwireless.org.ve.carpathiahost.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261504AbVGWDQL (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:16:11 -0400 Message-ID: <42E1A832.7010604@linuxwireless.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 21:15:14 -0500 From: Alejandro Bonilla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050513 Debian/1.7.8-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lee Revell CC: Blaisorblade , LKML , Andrian Bunk , "H. Peter Anvin" , torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Re: Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version References: <200507230244.11338.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> <42E1986B.8070202@linuxwireless.org> <1122088160.6510.7.camel@mindpipe> In-Reply-To: <1122088160.6510.7.camel@mindpipe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lee Revell wrote: >On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 20:07 -0500, Alejandro Bonilla wrote: > > >>I will get flames for this, but my laptop boots faster and sometimes >>responds faster in 2.4.27 than in 2.6.12. Sorry, but this is the fact >>for me. IBM T42. >> >> > >Sorry dude, but there's just no way that any automated process can catch >these. > > I'm not looking for an automated process for this. But for all in general, when moving from 2.6.11 to 2.6.12 or from any version to another. (At least in the same kernel branch) >You will have to provide a detailed bug report (with numbers) like >everyone else so we can fix it. "Waiting for it to fix itself" is the >WORST thing you can do. > > I never do this, believe me, but I could if I don't really see a problem. But there could really be one behind. >If you find a regression vs. an earlier kernel, please assume that >you're the ONLY one to notice it and respond accordingly. > > OK, I will, but I first of all need to learn how to tell if benchmarks are better or worse. >Lee > > > .Alejandro