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 AC3AC721 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 18:54:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fldsmtpe03.verizon.com (fldsmtpe03.verizon.com [140.108.26.142]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8BFE21B for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 18:54:25 +0000 (UTC) From: "Levin, Alexander" To: Julia Lawall Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:52:27 -0400 Message-ID: <20160826185227.GF25341@sasha-lappy> References: <20160826044651.GA25341@sasha-lappy> <20160826112635.GA27627@kroah.com> <20160826121119.GA29929@kroah.com> <20160826135141.GD25341@sasha-lappy> In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Greg KH , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , "Levin, Alexander" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Self nomination - Sasha Levin List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 09:55:18AM -0400, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, Levin, Alexander wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 08:11:19AM -0400, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 01:55:27PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > > Not sure if I was clear about what I was asking you to agree to :) > > > > > > > > Basically, we can take the patches sent to stable and the patches n= ot sent > > > > to stable as a training set, but then the machine learning comes up= with > > > > some algorithm that produces some results. An expert is needed to = evaluate > > > > the results. Ie for a thousand (number chosen at random) patches, = if the > > > > algorithm says it is a bug fixing patch, is it or isn't it, and vic= e versa. > > > > Of course, we could also evaluate on patches that previously have a= nd have > > > > not been sent too stable, but there is a problem there, because our= goal is > > > > to have more patches sent to stable than are already being sent the= re, so we > > > > need to show that the algorithm can capture what humans are missing= . > > > > > > I think that is very interesting research and I would be glad to help > > > out with it how ever I can, as the result might be very useful for us= . > > > > > > So sign me up! > > > > I'd be happy to do this as well. > > > > Per Greg's advice, I'm reviewing distro kernels for upstream commits th= at > > they carry which should have been in our LTS trees, those commits usual= ly > > aren't tagged in any way and can be a good set of commits for training = or > > validation. > > > > I do think that we should be using the algorithm to produce a list of a= uthors > > and maintainers who don't provide proper tags when they should and have= a > > discussion with them about why that doesn't happen and how we can help = them > > to get it "right" (vs just using the algorithm to apply patches). >=20 > Thanks for volunteering and for the suggestions. I will get back to you > about this shortly. I think it's also a great opportunity to discuss the differences between th= e commits Greg marked for stable and the ones I did. As with everything else = we see things differently so it'll be useful to learn more about why each of u= s picked (or didn't pick) a given commit. --=20 Thanks, Sasha=