Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 May 2018 16:09:05 -0700 | From | Tony Lindgren <> | Subject | Re: [Ksummit-discuss] bug-introducing patches |
| |
* Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> [180503 22:44]: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:52:29PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > 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. > > You've been flamed for testing -next? That's not been my experience and > frankly it's pretty horrifying that it's happening. Testing is pretty > much the whole point of -next existing in the first place so you have to > wonder why people are putting their trees there if they don't want > testing. I have seen a few issues with people reporting bugs on old > versions of -next but otherwise...
Yes I agree testing Linux next is very important. That's the best way for maintainers to ensure a usable -rc1 after a merge window. And then for the -rc cycle, there not much of need for chasing bugs to get things working.
Bugs reported for Linux next often seem to get fixed or reverted faster compared to the -rc cycle too. I think that's because people realize that their code will not get merged until it's been fixed.
So some daily testing of Linux next can save a lot scrambling after the merge window :)
Users don't usually upgrade kernels until after later -rc releases or only after major releases so that probably explains some of the -rc cycle fixes.
Regards,
Tony
| |