From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
"ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
<ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Distribution kernel bugzillas considered harmful
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 11:50:08 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180905115008.22e3d21f@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180905150315.GA10819@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 08:03:15 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> I am one of those strange people who rebase in order to improve
> bisectability. But one reason I can do that is that I have relatively
> few patches, and it gets harder the more patches I am carrying. I suppose
> that someone (not me!) could rebase -stable to make it more bisectable,
How would rebasing it make stable more bisectable? Once you rebase, you
don't have a tree that use to work? Although I guess you may find the
commit that caused the problem better. But rebasing creates a lot of
other issues, I would not recommend rebasing stable, as that would
totally break the RT stable tree work flow.
-- Steve
> but that sounds difficult, painful, and error-prone. Could added tooling
> make bisection work better? Sounds valuable, but non-trivial.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-05 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-05 10:13 James Bottomley
2018-09-05 11:37 ` Mark Brown
2018-09-05 15:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-09-05 15:50 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2018-09-05 16:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-09-05 16:45 ` James Bottomley
2018-09-05 17:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-09-05 19:25 ` Jiri Kosina
2018-09-05 19:40 ` James Bottomley
2018-09-06 19:54 ` Jiri Kosina
2018-09-18 13:43 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-09-18 14:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-09-18 15:01 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-09-18 15:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-18 15:34 ` Jens Axboe
2018-09-18 17:08 ` Mark Brown
2018-09-18 16:12 ` Mark Brown
2018-09-18 20:20 ` Takashi Iwai
2018-09-19 0:08 ` Mark Brown
2018-09-18 20:37 ` Takashi Iwai
2018-09-19 6:16 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-09-19 6:31 ` Takashi Iwai
2018-09-19 9:23 ` Jan Kara
2018-09-19 9:27 ` Takashi Iwai
2018-09-05 13:16 ` Takashi Iwai
2018-09-05 13:20 ` Jiri Kosina
2018-09-05 13:39 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2018-09-05 15:16 ` Sasha Levin
2018-09-05 16:44 ` Laura Abbott
2018-09-05 20:15 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2018-09-05 20:36 ` Takashi Iwai
2018-09-07 20:24 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2018-09-05 17:41 ` Laura Abbott
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180905115008.22e3d21f@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox