From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B28E4C81; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 01:17:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729819053; cv=none; b=VExyPzkRrY9wYtaVe7l1yThsjs9z/vINnyhJLCG/BcoIAI3Nv5bnhoVlhEslsACRyWpooZIld087y1tIjyR3VuQxznB7OFP6H8lRq0azp4nPJIaZWz8yyPBKfAW+n+soe9rYJ+Uzfvsyo7s3gPWdXVOlTFGCzbiRUM5tlnSRpdk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729819053; c=relaxed/simple; bh=A4OHkC/Gy6/+k6+8VPRKb67Rjjjo9qvTamzKGDikBuE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=alNjE56fjts7PVy3ZJMdibdpc526CKbq9XQvT0PXj9vPMa8l5YOPMZfPb76ga3G7Pf1TMFuXQISK6kYsUbdZOWed1j3u76oKayQI4iMYWQyCAqmifWYlZ2D1D3EFRKajNWmyXyyzJu7sNG4UnY6n0yuG1mCFjbtH76sfaLgmei8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BFFB9C4CEC7; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 01:17:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 21:17:28 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Luis Chamberlain Cc: Guenter Roeck , Michael Ellerman , Geert Uytterhoeven , Christoph Hellwig , Kees Cook , Sasha Levin , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, ksummit@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: linus-next: improving functional testing for to-be-merged pull requests Message-ID: <20241024211728.0e2304fd@rorschach.local.home> In-Reply-To: References: <20241022041243.7f2e53ad@rorschach.local.home> <20241023042004.405056f5@rorschach.local.home> <20241023051914.7f8cf758@rorschach.local.home> <8734km2lt7.fsf@mail.lhotse> <20241024010103.238ef40b@rorschach.local.home> <07422710-19b2-412b-b8d5-7ec51b708693@roeck-us.net> <20241024024928.6fb9d892@rorschach.local.home> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 10:53:19 -0700 Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 02:49:28AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Now I have to ask. What's the benefit of pushing to linux-next over > > waiting for the zero-day bot? > > 0-day only does build tests by default, there are many places which have > actual run time tests which *run* off of linux-next, those are both bots > and human. Granted you can get your own run time tests out of your own > branches but that's on each developer to set up and a developer's test > exposure of just one branch is small compared to linux-next. For example > I've seen obscure bugs creep up on linux-next for modules which only some > odd arch or setup was able to capture before which no test we had during > development was able to capture. So more exposure to system variability > and test variability. I have a test suite that takes 8 to 13 hours to run (depending on how many commits I'm testing) that I run before sending to Linus or linux-next. > > The other benefit is you get to see *way ahead of time* possible merge > conflicts, and if you can coordinate with the respective maintainers > which your code conflicts with, you can prepare so that this is smooth > sailing upon pull request to Linus. > Remember, this is talking about fixes after -rc1 not for things heading to the merge window. I find linux-next extremely useful for that work. But for fixes, what benefit is it to push to linux-next before sending to Linus a fix that adds a missing mutex_unlock() in the error path? -- Steve