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 A43F51885BD; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 15:07:48 +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=1730214468; cv=none; b=tRRAUr88PdGOc7YQKps+jyyIATkr1xsuJPTlgh8PLYMzxbOSxYF6CCcjU+COLfpMedY0v0WlOO68Sb1gl7OUnk0t7AhOGObGYBrv9PVPejv9CCzkdyfvQC78+xJ5q6o0hnqh/QLlfxll8/J8EezQAK5AUcvIPLQCTXGIDF08kzY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730214468; c=relaxed/simple; bh=C1zVDiJmkhDNVoXEePt/1a59o14M0sAgd9XObfWJAIU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=j/NWDtkG+gNTBysYwuKfOsktQWX3F7AbbdJuTr0S3zy6BmA7C9LoqyAycIdOcOi9EdZ4TdT72Caa71+TEiFtuYvFPd2QO1Z3Y0MAo+C+dRurOU9xB6tUOXVMe7JL5RzY0rqVnfYE++UbhNImpfN0v9fRR9qypMAni+u1tDtzs7s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ujTyeQCj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ujTyeQCj" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 124A0C4CECD; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 15:07:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1730214468; bh=C1zVDiJmkhDNVoXEePt/1a59o14M0sAgd9XObfWJAIU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ujTyeQCj9Db1mEuV7MCKDkEVoRSwj2OAQqr9BrK6Cr9cpeOMwji0v+tPgc47wkBoQ ls2BQ2Yd5CfnUue7EsqVgvxWOWdic/V9i4CXOd4j7y1+PLDQJGlcIaXpwef3rlufRL HncXuI9XsBLJMmYy+2JbZ+EeLQo+olvAGFUiys3Hzc7aTh/P5k9ChFbnMD+ijX5HBU MzH985WVzG6y3HExN+MuxIR4fJBIewhrOsbw1zyNS/LUbS8HTjrUIIjl4mKk0tVKpG 7sH2QSITsAmrfzOIUAx4Uu7P1mZsEPc8DWNmM9pdmMkRBZaQ/5T4DhvWTVw0FSO+h5 WHbszqKlRuWFQ== Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 11:07:46 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Kees Cook , 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: References: <792F4759-EA33-48B8-9AD0-FA14FA69E86E@kernel.org> <292de8f0-49e7-49c8-a327-b279924a5794@leemhuis.info> 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; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <292de8f0-49e7-49c8-a327-b279924a5794@leemhuis.info> On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 01:46:23PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >Hmmm. After all those mails in this thread improving (and maybe even >separating & somewhat automating[1]) pending-fixes to me still sounds >like time better spend, as then more things could tested before they >even read a PR; but yes, I understand, the timing/order of merges can >mess things up, so testing on PR time has benefits, too. Automating how? Having it be generated more often? >Maybe I'm just biased, as I could need a better working pending-fixes >for regression tracking[2], as that allows me to ensure regression fixes >are on the right track (which usually is the current merge window and >not the next). I'd love to throw the linus-next away once I find it useless :) -- Thanks, Sasha