From: email@example.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Dmitry Vyukov <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Guenter Roeck <email@example.com>, LKML <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Theodore Ts'o" <email@example.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Andrew Morton <email@example.com>, Linus Torvalds <firstname.lastname@example.org>, syzkaller <email@example.com>, Stephen Rothwell <firstname.lastname@example.org>, David Miller <email@example.com>, Fengguang Wu <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: what trees/branches to test on syzbot Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:02:17 -0600 [thread overview] Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+aGMoobn069+Lq1BT2YGqi9qYY9vHFtiXT2DLsJ5ZUh9Q@mail.gmail.com> (Dmitry Vyukov's message of "Tue, 16 Jan 2018 10:58:51 +0100") Dmitry Vyukov <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Guenter Roeck <email@example.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Several people proposed that linux-next should not be tested on >>> syzbot. While some people suggested that it needs to test as many >>> trees as possible. I've initially included linux-next as it is a >>> staging area before upstream tree, with the intention that patches are >>> _tested_ there, is they are not tested there, bugs enter upstream >>> tree. And then it takes much longer to get fix into other trees. >>> >>> So the question is: what trees/branches should be tested? Preferably >>> in priority order as syzbot can't test all of them. >>> >> >> I always thought that -next existed specifically to give people a >> chance to test the code in it. Maybe the question is where to report >> the test results ? > > FTR, from Guenter on another thread: > >> Interesting. Assuming that refers to linux-next, not linux-net, that >> may explain why linux-next tends to deteriorate. I wonder if I should >> drop it from my testing as well. I'll be happy to follow whatever the >> result of this exchange is and do the same. > > If we agree on some list of important branches, and what branches > specifically should not be tested with automatic reporting, I think it > will benefit everybody. > +Fengguang, can you please share your list and rationale behind it? The problem is testing linux-next and then using get-maintainer.pl to report the problem. If you are resource limited I would start by testing Linus's tree to find the existing bugs, and to get a baseline. Using get-maintainer.pl is fine for sending emails to developers there. After that I would test the individual tress that are pulled into linux-next. So that any issue not found in Linus's tree can be attributed to the tree you are testing and sent the the appropriate maintainer. After that I would consider testing linux-next itself and see if any issues are caused by the merger of all of those trees. Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-16 17:04 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-01-16 7:51 Dmitry Vyukov 2018-01-16 9:45 ` Guenter Roeck 2018-01-16 9:58 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-01-16 16:58 ` Guenter Roeck 2018-01-16 17:02 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message] 2018-01-16 17:34 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-01-22 13:32 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-06-09 6:31 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-06-09 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds 2018-06-10 1:51 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-06-10 6:11 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-06-11 1:22 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-06-15 9:54 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-06-18 4:52 ` Stephen Rothwell 2018-06-18 6:10 ` Eric W. Biederman 2018-06-18 13:54 ` Alan Cox 2018-06-26 10:54 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-06-26 14:16 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-06-26 14:38 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-06-26 14:54 ` Guenter Roeck 2018-06-26 20:37 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-07-05 10:49 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-07-06 23:26 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-07-10 0:35 ` Andrew Morton 2018-07-10 2:13 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-01-19 1:48 ` Fengguang Wu 2018-01-22 13:34 ` Dmitry Vyukov
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 \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: what trees/branches to test on syzbot' \ /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
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.