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 AC24ED1C for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 15:17:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-co1nam03on0096.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.40.96]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45AD37A6 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 15:17:00 +0000 (UTC) From: Sasha Levin To: Takashi Iwai , James Bottomley , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 15:16:58 +0000 Message-ID: <20180905151657.GP16300@sasha-vm> References: <1536142432.8121.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20180905133916.GA22160@puremoods> In-Reply-To: <20180905133916.GA22160@puremoods> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Distribution kernel bugzillas considered harmful List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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=