From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from bh-25.webhostbox.net ([208.91.199.152]:56133 "EHLO
        bh-25.webhostbox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753041AbeDXRq6 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;stable@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 13:46:58 -0400
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 10:46:56 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, patches@kernelci.org,
        lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>,
        linux- stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, tytso@mit.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/95] 4.9.96-stable review
Message-ID: <20180424174656.GA11717@roeck-us.net>
References: <20180422135210.432103639@linuxfoundation.org>
 <CA+G9fYt_OKQOx7xFPsbgj8+vXDJGR0Oc3XWJ8iQfMM=UkFVAeQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180423165750.GA27986@kroah.com>
 <20180423180137.GA26974@kroah.com>
 <20180423222553.lbxx3cwly2fbvabs@xps>
 <20180424072635.GD18419@kroah.com>
 <20180424172311.meeo6wrsp4rtxxiz@xps>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180424172311.meeo6wrsp4rtxxiz@xps>
Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <stable.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 12:23:11PM -0500, Dan Rue wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 09:26:35AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:25:53PM -0500, Dan Rue wrote:
> > > I made a few comments inline regarding the reported failures. Also, as
> > > this report is pushing 200 lines now with all of our tests and
> > > environments (about 8*22 test runs), I'm planning on making some changes
> > > in the next few weeks to make it more concise and useful. Any
> > > suggestions or feature requests are most welcome.
> > 
> > How about only reporting problems?  Having tests "pass" is the norm and
> > should always happen, right?  That would make the reports smaller.
> 
> I agree, though I would like to provide a bit of context so that people
> new to the process have some idea about testing breadth and depth - but

I did that initially, but found that it is only confusing. Sure, there
should be a means to look up the actual tests, but for the notification e-mail
only pass/fail is relevant.

I found that even "skipped" is confusing, because people started asking why
tests are being skipped.

Guenter