From: Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: davej@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@sisk.pl
Subject: Regression tracking [WAS: Re: recvmsg sleeping from invalid context]
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 20:52:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201201222052.02135.maciej.rutecki@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120122.143728.1710688129934394279.davem@davemloft.net>
On niedziela, 22 stycznia 2012 o 20:37:28 David Miller wrote:
> From: Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 20:31:51 +0100
>
> > These entries are using for tracking regressions, for *all* kernel parts,
> > without any exception. I see no reason to treat someone differently. If
> > netdev provides any interface to tracking regressions, then show me it.
> > But then why you do not use one common tool for all kernel?
>
> This mailing list is the tracking mechanism.
>
> You can create whatever you want, but I can guarentee that the very
> people who can actually move the bug forward and fix the problem will
> look at it.
>
> It's been like this for ages, Andrew Morton understands how we wish
> to track bugs, and that we don't want to use bugzilla for that purpose.
OK. But tracking regressions in two (or more) places is nonsense. And this
puts into question all of my current work, such as how to analyze
(automatically) the progress of the whole kernel and its quality per each -rc.
Problem to discussion, but if everyone will do as you wish, it will all work
went to waste.
I do not say that resolving regression in mailinglist is bad. I think that is
as good as bug tracker. Bug entry is helps us store information in one places.
E.g. "Refernces" tag redirect people to discussion in LKML. But I say again: I
think that LKML is not regression tracker, but helps solve regression.
Regards
--
Maciej Rutecki
http://www.mrutecki.pl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-22 19:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-13 18:24 recvmsg sleeping from invalid context Dave Jones
2012-01-13 18:27 ` David Miller
2012-01-14 21:43 ` Dave Jones
2012-01-14 22:16 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-16 7:21 ` Glauber Costa
2012-01-22 7:54 ` Maciej Rutecki
2012-01-22 19:10 ` David Miller
2012-01-22 19:31 ` Maciej Rutecki
2012-01-22 19:37 ` David Miller
2012-01-22 19:52 ` Maciej Rutecki [this message]
2012-01-22 20:07 ` Regression tracking David Miller
2012-01-23 0:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-02-23 22:52 ` Florian Mickler
2012-02-23 23:05 ` Dave Jones
2012-02-23 23:22 ` Florian Mickler
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=201201222052.02135.maciej.rutecki@gmail.com \
--to=maciej.rutecki@gmail.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).