From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262979AbVGOAjF (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:39:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262944AbVGOAjF (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:39:05 -0400 Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:7632 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262979AbVGOAjA (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:39:00 -0400 To: Mark Gross Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Why is 2.6.12.2 less stable on my laptop than 2.6.10? References: <200507140912.22532.mgross@linux.intel.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel> From: Andi Kleen Date: 15 Jul 2005 02:38:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: <200507140912.22532.mgross@linux.intel.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mark Gross writes: > > The problem is the process, not than the code. > * The issues are too much ad-hock code flux without enough disciplined/formal > regression testing and review. It's basically impossible to regression test swsusp except to release it. Its success or failure depends on exactly the driver combination/platform/BIOS version etc. e.g. all drivers have to cooperate and the particular bugs in your BIOS need to be worked around etc. Since that is quite fragile regressions are common. However in some other cases I agree some more regression testing before release would be nice. But that's not how Linux works. Linux does regression testing after release. -Andi