From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 882F0C282CE for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:18:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46F2C222BE for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:18:08 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550049488; bh=OBwtMif6U+gAaRqAxV3AgL7zafK6ORpn+3ToEs1jewg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=iyNb66JBXOSEa0AEhWLzMMEZX13p+KxJUuz8Pqy0emauw7hg84M7XoHRqvF5KJPHp uPVhv3hlQz4lZ7RL0m/fxlT6IsEWYsukLFWov2AX1CEfKjn2Q+2NI4am5iee8vhJc8 5SvOMX0AIUs0GkuguA/PeRdQN9HKuRL4lZjSoWPs= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731219AbfBMJSG (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 04:18:06 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:59532 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728468AbfBMJSG (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 04:18:06 -0500 Received: from localhost (5356596B.cm-6-7b.dynamic.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 286E8222BE; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:18:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550049485; bh=OBwtMif6U+gAaRqAxV3AgL7zafK6ORpn+3ToEs1jewg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=aJBR3p8UeaFYq4Y9hKmUYhWwNBpI/rhmNsqsWY5DyLtM70GEH2zsy934/UJrWt0UQ YlRgwty3vJMnXJEYcGPMOCe90hxSs6XnD2eriPsByXASy9gNMWSFhdXkTRVXQc8CVi P6OKqoUYaAOb5ywdBMwvzWG5uev3p2PZSm37lpAE= Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 10:18:03 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Steve French , Sasha Levin , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , LKML , "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] FS, MM, and stable trees Message-ID: <20190213091803.GA2308@kroah.com> References: <20190212170012.GF69686@sasha-vm> <20190213073707.GA2875@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:01:25AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > I think the main difference between these review announcements > and true CI is what kind of guaranty you get for a release candidate > from NOT getting a test failure response, which is one of the main > reasons that where holding back xfs stable fixes for so long. That's not true, I know to wait for some responses before doing a release of these kernels. > Best effort testing in timely manner is good, but a good way to > improve confidence in stable kernel releases is a publicly > available list of tests that the release went through. We have that, you aren't noticing them... > Do you have any such list of tests that you *know* are being run, > that you (or Sasha) run yourself or that you actively wait on an > ACK from a group before a release? Yes, look at the responses to those messages from Guenter, Shuah, Jon, kernel.ci, Red Hat testing, the Linaro testing teams, and a few other testers that come and go over time. Those list out all of the tests that are being run, and the results of those tests. I also get a number of private responses from different build systems from companies that don't want to post in public, which is fine, I understand the issues involved with that. I would argue that the stable releases are better tested than Linus's releases for that reason alone :) thanks, greg k-h