lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [Ksummit-discuss] bug-introducing patches
    On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:52:29PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
    > On 05/02/2018 08:10 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
    > > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 11:05:50AM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
    > > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 07:46:34PM +0000, Sasha Levin wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > As you said, the regression should be fixed "asap", not "immediately".
    > > > > It should go through some sort of review and testing the maintainers are
    > > > > happy with, but unfourtenately it doesn't happen now.
    > > >
    > > > Doesn't happen some of the time. It's not like this is a universal
    > > > problem.
    > > >
    > > > Especially for driver specific things there's at times no realistic
    > > > prospect of getting useful independent review of fixes, the hardware
    > > > isn't always widely available and if the fix isn't a pure software thing
    > > > at some point you just have to trust the judgement of the vendor.
    > >
    > > And sometimes the Demon Murphy will cause a regression fix for user A,
    > > to cause breakage for slightly different hardware belonging to user B. :-(
    > >
    >
    > Believe me, I get my share of those. 7dac4a1726a9 ("ext4: add validity checks
    > for bitmap block numbers") and its fix 22be37acce25 (" ext4: fix bitmap
    > position validation") are pretty good examples. Yet, at the same time I had
    > to deal with three additional CVEs in the ext4 code. Even though the initial
    > fix for one of the four was buggy, I am glad that I got the other three through
    > stable releases.
    >
    > As for -next, me and others stopped reporting bugs in it, because when we do
    > we tend to get flamed for the "noise". Is anyone aware (or cares) that mips
    > and nds32 images don't build ? Soaking clothes in an empty bathtub won't make
    > them wet, and bugs in code which no one builds, much less tests or uses, won't
    > be found.
    >
    > I can only repeat - what we need is more sophisticated testing, not a more
    > restrictive process.

    I agree, and people are working on this. But we can always use more!

    thanks,

    greg k-h

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2018-05-03 14:08    [W:3.937 / U:0.496 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site