Re: AUTOSEL process

Pavel Machek
2023-03-07T21:18:56Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1319 bytes --]

Hi!

> > So to summarize, that buggy commit was backported even though:
> >
> > * There were no indications that it was a bug fix (and thus potentially
> > suitable for stable) in the first place.
> > * On the AUTOSEL thread, someone told you the commit is broken.
> > * There was already a thread that reported a regression caused by the commit.
> > Easily findable via lore search.
> > * There was also already a pending patch that Fixes the commit. Again easily
> > findable via lore search.
> >
> > So it seems a *lot* of things went wrong, no? Why? If so many things can go
> > wrong, it's not just a "mistake" but rather the process is the problem...
>
> BTW, another cause of this is that the commit (66f99628eb24) was AUTOSEL'd after
> only being in mainline for 4 days, and *released* in all LTS kernels after only
> being in mainline for 12 days. Surely that's a timeline befitting a critical
> security vulnerability, not some random neural-network-selected commit that
> wasn't even fixing anything?

I see this problem, too, "-stable" is more experimental than Linus's
releases.

I believe that -stable would be more useful without AUTOSEL process.

Best regards,
Pavel
--
People of Russia, stop Putin before his war on Ukraine escalates.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]