Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Distribution kernel bugzillas considered harmful

[Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com>]

On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 09:39:16AM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 03:16:59PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>> > Second suggestion is that the bugzillas need to say much more strongly
>> > that the reporter really needs to confirm the fix in upstream and do
>> > the bisection themselves (and ideally request the backport to stable
>> > themselves).
>>
>> OK, distros definitely need to try hard not to annoy upstream devs.
>>
>> In the case of SUSE Kernel, we usually ask testing the latest
>> (more-or-less) vanilla kernel at first.  If it's an upstream problem,
>> then it's often tossed to the upstream.  If it's already addressed in
>> the upstream kernel, we take the responsibility for backports.  Asking
>> bisection by reporter is usually the last resort.
>>
>> It'd be helpful if we get any suggestion to improve the process.
>
>It would be awesome to have a "bisect@home" type of thing with a similar
>idea like seti@home and folding@home. Have a central queue where
>developers can submit upstream commits and testcases, and a swarm of
>volunteer drones would grab and bisect-build them until the
>bug-introducing commit is identified and reported back.
>
>I'll totally host the hell out of this.

I don't think KernelCI are too far on this front. They're already
working on auto bisection, so if there's an ability to add (simple)
testcases you'll be all set.

--
Thanks,
Sasha