regressions.lists.linux.dev archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
	pabeni@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux kernel regressions list <regressions@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: clarify the need to sending reverts as patches
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 12:02:12 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230329120212.08755afb@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <09f58115-e3f2-52be-47d6-85cde9b92d25@leemhuis.info>

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 11:04:01 +0200 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> FWIW, I see how this is well meant, but I'm not really happy with the
> last sentence, as one of the problems I notice when handling regression
> is: it sometimes takes weeks to get regressions fixed that could have
> been solved quickly by reverting the culprit (and reapplying an improved
> version of the change or the change together and a fix later). That's
> why Documentation/process/handling-regressions.rst strongly suggest to
> revert changes that cause regressions if the problem can't be fixed
> quickly -- especially if the change made it into a proper release. The
> two texts thus now not slightly contradict each other.
> 
> I noticed that this change was already applied, but how would you feel
> about changing the second sentence into something like this maybe?

Please escalate the cases which can be fixed by easy reverts because 
I can't think of any in networking :(

The entire doc is based on our painful experience telling people the
same thing over and over again, we don't want to include things which
don't actually happen on netdev. Longer the doc is the less likely
people will actually read it :(

      reply	other threads:[~2023-03-29 19:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20230327172646.2622943-1-kuba@kernel.org>
2023-03-29  9:04 ` [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: clarify the need to sending reverts as patches Thorsten Leemhuis
2023-03-29 19:02   ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]

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=20230329120212.08755afb@kernel.org \
    --to=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=regressions@leemhuis.info \
    --cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
    /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).