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 DC88AB88 for ; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:01:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail7.hitachi.co.jp (mail7.hitachi.co.jp [133.145.228.42]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 105517C for ; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:01:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mlsv3.hitachi.co.jp (unknown [133.144.234.166]) by mail7.hitachi.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B11B1D382 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 00:01:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from vshuts02.hitachi.co.jp (vshuts02.hitachi.co.jp [10.201.6.84]) by mfilter05.hitachi.co.jp (Switch-3.3.4/Switch-3.3.4) with ESMTP id t6CF1RNv030213 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 00:01:27 +0900 Message-ID: <55A28142.90409@hitachi.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 00:01:22 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: <55A1407E.5080800@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <55A1407E.5080800@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Issues with stable process List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 2015/07/12 1:12, Sasha Levin wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'd like to propose a topic discussing issues that are caused as a result of the > way development happens upstream, and the way we integrate with distros that affect > the quality of stable trees: > [...] > 2. The review cycle: I've *never* ended up receiving comments during review cycle > of a stable release. I've received comments either when I've sent my "added to the..." > mails when I've added a patch in, which usually came from the authors of the patch > or the maintainers of the subsystem, and I've received comments after the tree has > shipped - when it actually broke something. > > We need to explore ways to integrate the review process better with the end users, > possibly by extending it to allow distributions to ship "proposed" review kernels > rather than waiting for us to finalize a stable kernel before they start working > on shipping it. Hmm, it sounds like distro's business... > > 3. Cross tree verification and auditing: There seems to be a fair amount of LTS > kernels that are maintained openly on the stable@ ML, and even a bigger amount > if the Canonical folks decide to play ball at any stage. While ideally each tree > should contain (if required, correctly backported) patches that are relevant only > to that given tree, we have no standard way to verify that. > > We need a mechanism that would let us audit the existence (and non-existence) of > patches in an easy way, and to compare backports between stable trees to help verify > their correctness. Agreed. Can't we use bugzilla.kernel.org for this purpose? Of course, more automated-way is better :) > 4. Upstream monitoring: I've suggested to Greg that we have a bot looking at > commits going upstream, and for every commit marked as for stable it would attempt > to apply it to all relevant stable trees and build them, and on failure would > notify the author. > > Greg objected for two main reasons: the first is that we should put more effort > into trying to fix any possible issues which arise from failure to build and > backport before we send mails out, which I accepted. The other issue was that he > doesn't want to generate too much noise, and if the patch doesn't look important > enough and only applies to the latest stable it's enough, and no need to bother > people to backport it. Hmm, I think it depends on how many stable trees to be maintained officially. We can see 2 stables and 7 longterms on www.kernel.org, porting each bugfix to all of them is hard... Thank you, > > So this is mostly an open discussion: what do people expect to do (if anything) > as a result of marking a patch for stable? What do people think about the increased > noise? Is there a better way to do it rather than by mails? > > > Thanks, > Sasha > _______________________________________________ > Ksummit-discuss mailing list > Ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss > -- Masami HIRAMATSU Linux Technology Research Center, System Productivity Research Dept. Center for Technology Innovation - Systems Engineering Hitachi, Ltd., Research & Development Group E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com