From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Estrin, Alex" Subject: RE: crash in 4.14-rc1 with IPoIB Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 16:17:10 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20170920095339.zhfymeyfbhiyepz5@linux-x5ow.site> <20170920163237.GD536@obsidianresearch.com> <1506101272.5172.11.camel@redhat.com> <20170922194834.GA26479@obsidianresearch.com> <1506114386.120853.2.camel@redhat.com> <20170922211727.GA2348@obsidianresearch.com> <1506120161.120853.10.camel@redhat.com> <20170923073843.GX5788@mtr-leonro.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170923073843.GX5788-U/DQcQFIOTAAJjI8aNfphQ@public.gmane.org> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Leon Romanovsky , Doug Ledford Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Johannes Thumshirn , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Thomas Bogendoerfer , Bart Van Assche , Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Hello, One minor note regarding the original commit 523633359224 that broke the core. It seem it was let through without trivial validation, otherwise it wouldn't pass the checkpatch. Thanks, Alex. > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 06:42:41PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-09-22 at 15:17 -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 05:06:26PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > > > > > > > Sure, I get that, but I was already out on PTO on the 30th. What > > > > sucks > > > > is that it landed right after I was out. But I plan to have the > > > > pull > > > > request in before EOB today, so the difference between the 20th and > > > > today is neglible. Especially since lots of people doing QA > > > > testing > > > > prefer to take -rc tags, in that case, the difference is non- > > > > existent. > > > > > > My thinking was that people should test -rc, > > > > Great, with you here... > > > > > but if they have problems > > > they could grab your for-rc branch and check if their issue is > > > already > > > fixed.. > > > > They can do this too... > > > > But if that still doesn't resolve their problem, a quick check of the > > mailing list contents isn't out of the question either. In that case, > > they would have found the solution to their problem. But, when you get > > right down to it, only one person reported it in addition to the > > original poster, so either other people saw the original post and > > compensated in their own testing, or (the more likely I think), most > > people don't start testing -rcs until after -rc2. > > I don't know about other people, but our testing of -rc starts on -rc1 > and we are not waiting for -rc2. From my observe of netdev, they also > start to test -rc immediately. > > Otherwise, what is the point of the week between -rc1 and -rc2? > > > Which is why I try to set -rc2 as a milestone for several purposes. > > For getting in the bulk of the known fixes, but also as a branching > > point for for-next. > > > > -- > > Doug Ledford > > GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD > > Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html