From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <groeck@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: what trees/branches to test on syzbot
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:02:17 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <873735n3dy.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+aGMoobn069+Lq1BT2YGqi9qYY9vHFtiXT2DLsJ5ZUh9Q@mail.gmail.com> (Dmitry Vyukov's message of "Tue, 16 Jan 2018 10:58:51 +0100")
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Guenter Roeck <groeck@google.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Several people proposed that linux-next should not be tested on
>>> syzbot. While some people suggested that it needs to test as many
>>> trees as possible. I've initially included linux-next as it is a
>>> staging area before upstream tree, with the intention that patches are
>>> _tested_ there, is they are not tested there, bugs enter upstream
>>> tree. And then it takes much longer to get fix into other trees.
>>>
>>> So the question is: what trees/branches should be tested? Preferably
>>> in priority order as syzbot can't test all of them.
>>>
>>
>> I always thought that -next existed specifically to give people a
>> chance to test the code in it. Maybe the question is where to report
>> the test results ?
>
> FTR, from Guenter on another thread:
>
>> Interesting. Assuming that refers to linux-next, not linux-net, that
>> may explain why linux-next tends to deteriorate. I wonder if I should
>> drop it from my testing as well. I'll be happy to follow whatever the
>> result of this exchange is and do the same.
>
> If we agree on some list of important branches, and what branches
> specifically should not be tested with automatic reporting, I think it
> will benefit everybody.
> +Fengguang, can you please share your list and rationale behind it?
The problem is testing linux-next and then using get-maintainer.pl to
report the problem.
If you are resource limited I would start by testing Linus's tree to
find the existing bugs, and to get a baseline. Using get-maintainer.pl
is fine for sending emails to developers there.
After that I would test the individual tress that are pulled into
linux-next. So that any issue not found in Linus's tree can be
attributed to the tree you are testing and sent the the appropriate
maintainer.
After that I would consider testing linux-next itself and see if any
issues are caused by the merger of all of those trees.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-16 17:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-16 7:51 what trees/branches to test on syzbot Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-16 9:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-01-16 9:58 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-01-16 16:58 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-01-16 17:02 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2018-01-16 17:34 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-01-22 13:32 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-09 6:31 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-09 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-10 1:51 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-06-10 6:11 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-11 1:22 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-06-15 9:54 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-18 4:52 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-06-18 6:10 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-06-18 13:54 ` Alan Cox
2018-06-26 10:54 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-26 14:16 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-06-26 14:38 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-26 14:54 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-06-26 20:37 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-07-05 10:49 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-07-06 23:26 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-07-10 0:35 ` Andrew Morton
2018-07-10 2:13 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-01-19 1:48 ` Fengguang Wu
2018-01-22 13:34 ` Dmitry Vyukov
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=873735n3dy.fsf@xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=groeck@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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