From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C872B413 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 08:49:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 406DC20B for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 08:49:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 14:26:46 +0530 From: Vinod Koul To: Laurent Pinchart Message-ID: <20160726085646.GQ9681@localhost> References: <20160725190125.GS5537@wotan.suse.de> <20160725202343.GJ11405@piout.net> <20160726031007.GH9681@localhost> <1781582.RPTOZ0rvdq@avalon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1781582.RPTOZ0rvdq@avalon> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Nominating Fengguang Wu - 0-day List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:16:40AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hello, > > On Tuesday 26 Jul 2016 08:40:07 Vinod Koul wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:23:43PM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > > On 25/07/2016 at 21:01:25 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote : > > >> It surprises Fengguang Wu hasn't been nominated > > >> yet, so I'd like to nominate him. The mechanical process should > > >> probably include in the future a scrape for top Reported-by > > >> contributors. > > > > > > That's a good point. > > > > > >> Fengguang's 0-day infrastructure is invaluable to day to day kernel > > >> development, having him present would be great for any questions that > > >> may come up. Getting a statistical overview / update of impact / any > > >> major architectural changes of the 0-day infrastructure would also be > > >> very useful. If maintainers are not yet using 0-day it would be great > > >> to hear why. If your contributors are not using 0-day (I know some of > > >> you exist) I'd like to know why you don't use it, I often run into > > >> issues on linux-next which at times I have to fix, if 0-day would have > > >> been used a folowup fix would not have been needed. > > > > I am using it a lot :) > > > > > Well, I think it would also help to know how the patch/git tree > > > selection is done. Lately, I've been receiving less reports from 0-day > > > and some issues were found by Arnd's autobuilders after hitting > > > linux-next. I used to get report of compilation breakage 10-15 minutes > > > after the patch submission. > > I second that. 0-day is an amazing tool, but relying on it requires developers > to trust that the tool will perform its job as expected. A proper > understanding of the logic behind patch/git tree selection would be very > valuable, as well as how the build bot handles its 500+ kernel configurations. Agreed, although in his report he does mention the tree used, but would be great if the logic is Documented somewhere. There seems some basic Documentation up at [1] and [2] Also the reports can be put on webpage. Last test results of maintainer trees and results of patches run on mailing list. I think that data is available but not present... > Even though 0-day is an external tool, maybe it deserves an entry in > Documentation/ ? A public web page hosting the list of all git registered git > trees could be useful too. > > > Pls check if the mailing list is still subscribed. I had the same issue > > and found that his ID was kicked off from the list, which is quite > > typical w/ Intel accounts & vger. > > > > Since work is done by scripts, people may not have noticed. [1]: https://01.org/lkp/documentation/0-day-test-service [2]: https://01.org/lkp/ -- ~Vinod