From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B7C53FE0 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 09:46:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1ACA22C41; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 09:46:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1692697573; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=DjCm5FPEirwSaHIHDyBvS01aqx2qLVs9Jpu6R/lwGB8=; b=MGSIjMFnXokZFDp88Ui2HckWGjMpK4llgqzZ4o1ZyBo8zqKtLRon19KeBn7sr22jT8E6g9 LouZEbkAVm5BkgioVdqEDrV7inAY1j9LHUreXFUEvb64tjZ1fbu7mCLMsDT5isWnmG30ZB 4+DdEIXmyvn3KgErF0Y2IEETCFwYHf8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1692697573; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=DjCm5FPEirwSaHIHDyBvS01aqx2qLVs9Jpu6R/lwGB8=; b=Zu+OXCoMHVjau/9iPQOrWBuVKjyUbkWlfLvMl4uazG9aHw8bSHFQ1mu/555BidFFQQrSqi nM1jAxRZiIOJxOBQ== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1C2D13919; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 09:46:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id NCp3J+WD5GRuDwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 22 Aug 2023 09:46:13 +0000 Received: by quack3.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2A10EA0774; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 11:46:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 11:46:13 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Vegard Nossum Cc: Leon Romanovsky , Linus Torvalds , Jakub Kicinski , Linus Walleij , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrew Lunn , Laurent Pinchart , Luis Chamberlain , Josef Bacik , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, Jeff Layton , Song Liu Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Maintainer burnout Message-ID: <20230822094613.bxtsjlnkhaypoflj@quack3> References: <20230817093914.GE21668@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <44814ed5-7bab-4e56-9ca6-189870f97f41@lunn.ch> <20230817081957.1287b966@kernel.org> <20230818080949.7b17b0d5@kernel.org> <20230819064537.GM22185@unreal> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon 21-08-23 21:23:18, Vegard Nossum wrote: > On 8/19/23 08:45, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > It is worth to try to get honest feedback from active developers/contributors/vendors > > what is their "real" excuse for not doing code review. > > > > I saw in this thread about "have no time to do code review" answers and we > > all can relate to it, but IMHO it is just an excuse and not the real reason. > > Especially for a people who are employed by big corporations to do their > > upstream work. > > For some drive-by or would-be reviewers, at least, I think part of the > problem is perverse or misaligned incentives. > > If you write code and your patches are accepted in the kernel, it counts > towards your commit count, which is a metric that people look at, for > better or worse (probably worse). > > When you review a patch and you find some problem with it, the patch > will NOT get accepted in the kernel (at least not in that form), and > your name will NOT appear in the git log. So in a way, in order for > your contribution to get recorded, you have to give the patch a > passing grade -OR- you are now on the hook to keep reviewing every > following iteration of the patch until it's in a state where you're > completely sure it doesn't have any problems. > > (Of course, if you just rubber-stamp your Reviewed-by: on everything > then you are bound to be found out sooner or later -- or at the very > least seen as an unreliable reviewer.) > > But let's assume you don't give out your Reviewed-by: without having > REALLY checked the patch thoroughly. Even then, mistakes can slip in. > In a way, being a reviewer and missing something critical is even > worse than being the author and missing something critical. Is it even > worth putting your Reviewed-by: on something if you're not 100% sure > this patch is not going to cause an issue? Are people going to trust > you in the future if you make a mistake in your review? > > Let's say you're completely sure you found an issue with the patch. Why > not just stay silent, hope that nobody catches it, and then submit your > own patch later to fix it? That will get your name in the log. Even > worse, if it's a security issue you can maybe write an exploit for it > and either get a bounty from Google or sell it for serious $$$ to > various malicious actors. [Note that I'm not saying most people would do > this; I don't know. I am just using it as an example to show that the > incentives are disproportionate.] > > The incentives that remain (as far as I can tell) are: > > 1) you get familiar with a specific part of the kernel, and > 2) you get goodwill and recognition from other kernel developers. I agree it is good to create positive incentives to provide good review. But I believe what really makes people do good reviews is the sense of common responsibility - you don't want buggy or misdesigned stuff to get into the subsystem you work with because that's going to make life harder for everybody including you in the future. And I understand the "tragedy of commons" (IOW selfishness) works against this so incentives or review-trading or other methods can help but ultimately it is IMHO about making people understand and accept this shared responsibility... Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR