On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 10:52:04AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 07/07/2015 10:18 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

> >Off the top of my head the automated ones I'm aware of are Olof's build
> >& boot test, Dan running smatch and I think some other static analysis
> >stuff, someone (not sure who?) running some coccinelle stuff, Coverity
> >and I've got a builder too.

> Plus mine, of course. Only part missing is automated bisect and e-mail
> if something starts failing.

> Which reminds me - do you use buildbot ? I think you are sending automated
> e-mail on failures. It would help me a lot if someone had automated bisect
> and the ability to e-mail results using buildbot to get me started.

No, not me - all my failure reports are lovingly hand crafted using
traditional artisan techniques.  Kevin, Tyler and Fengguang have things
but apart from 0day I think everything is still manually triggered.

> Not really sure what to do about it. What turned out to help in the last
> two companies I worked for was automatic revert of broken patches. That
> sounds radical and I dislike it myself, but it helped.

Perhaps that's something we should be discussing?  It may be something
that we just evolve a solution for as we proceed though - right now it's
largely theoretical.  For -next Stephen will often carry extra patches
that make sense.