Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TECH TOPIC] QR encoded oops for the kernel

[Levente Kurusa <levex@linux.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3844 bytes --]

Hi,

On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:07:43PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> I'll note this discussion has started mutating to a more general "how
> do we get more useful bug reports in front of developers", which I
> think is a good thing.
> 
> However, I'm still not sure how useful it would be to have a tech
> topic (or a core topic) dedicated to the matter, because we've had
> discussions about and at the end of the day, what's probably really
> necessary is to have someone, or a small team, dedicated all or most
> of their time to:
> 
> a) improving kerneloops.org
> b) finding interesting patterns in the bulk reported data, and then
> forwarding that on to developers
> c) finding ways of automating (b)

* One possible way of improving kerneloops is that once an oops happens
  more than X times then it would be automatically sent to the
  maintainer.

* Adding some more stats specifically for the RCs, so we can get more
  information during the RC phase of a release.
  We have essentially the same for Stable and Longterm kernels.

(By the way, am I the only receiving frequent 503 Service Unavailable
errors from the oops.kernel.org site?)

> 
> QR encoded oops might be a means towards that end, but there might be
> other things that could be done as well.
> 
> If someone were to *do* all of this work, then reporting on it and
> then asking for suggestions about how this service could be improved,
> might make a great tech topic.
> 
> But in the absence of that, can folks suggest ways that this doesn't
> turn into a "I know, let's put a bell on the cat!" sort of discussion
> that doesn't lead to anything useful?
>

Here are a few topics I think are worth discussing at the summit with
regards to this topic:

* How to disseminate bug reports?
   Have comaintainers looking at bugzilla and oops.kernel.org?
  For some time now, I have been trying to do some cleanup, i.e.
  fix some bugs there, but since I lack the capabilities to close bugs
  it still remains to others. I would, though, be very pleased to
  clean up bugzilla, if I got the capabilities.

* QR code in general.
   Is it actually worth it? I mean as it currently stands the QR code
  takes quite a bit of the screen and takes place over some (possibly
  valuable) information. This is because it is currently in the
  topleft corner. There was a suggestion to move it to the center, but
  I think that would as well take some information away from someone
  who wants to find out the information themselves.

   If we accept the QR encoding stuff to the kernel, then that will
  most likely mean that kerneloops will receive more (probably
  valuable) information. I think that this is a good thing, since as
  Greg mentioned we will better now which subsystems struggle. Maybe
  adding a bugzilla entry as well seems reasonable and maybe if we do
  clean up bugzilla, maintainers will eventually look at it and the
  bugzilla thing will become viable.

   Automatically adding a bugzilla might make sense as well once a
  certain oops hits the 'X-times-happenned' level. That way
  maintainers wouldn't be overflown with new bugs by mail.

* Should maintainers be sent digests of the oopses from
  oops.kernel.org and the bugs from bugzilla?
   Okay, I know that most maintainers get mails from the bugzilla each
  time a new bug is filed, but I guess a digest would be better. It
  wouldn't overflow a maintainer's mailbox nor it would be
  automatically added to the maintainer's spam folder.
  A feature like this already exists in bugzilla, in the 'Reports'
  menu, but it does not send any mails, so I guess that could be
  automatized.

After all, if the commitee decides that this topic is viable, I would
be happy to participate.

Thanks,
    Levente Kurusa.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]