Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753709AbdIEVvA (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 5 Sep 2017 17:51:00 -0400
Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]:36775 "EHLO
        mail-it0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753079AbdIEVu6 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 5 Sep 2017 17:50:58 -0400
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb474anOYGWN/UD3sB07NKzk0LVKyYFdPG9zyakcYRffJIi2qcVELNj+zWW87u9dG0qUNfTr2EeR1AWzqm9zz6s=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170905214046.ishenhbj7jrtoufc@gmail.com>
References: <20170904093158.k6pg3ytcbotjlhv5@gmail.com> <CA+55aFy=BswnBBFQneCywMNGq-=Kp0-iBKnT6_FvHb8cA8stkw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170905214046.ishenhbj7jrtoufc@gmail.com>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 14:50:57 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: EAym68hOuV1sf0e5nUV4YR0Dxeo
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxs+=Z8pR9zJ0Y2x2tjY8iessvcY_Or=vL0s=3P5y1VOw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/mm changes for v4.14: PCID support, 5-level paging
 support, Secure Memory Encryption support
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1056
Lines: 28

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hm, just as background, there are no regression reports I'm aware of
> against any of these trees, plus most of the dangerous commits have
> been in linux-next for at least two weeks - the majority of them even
> longer. The last 2-4 commits of x86/mm are fresher.

Side note: I do not believe a lot of people actually run linux-next on
laptops, so suspend/resume likely doesn't get a lot of testing in
next.

I think most people who run linux-next tend to be automation things on farms.

Don't get me wrong - I love linux-next and your tip testing, but I
think linux-next is best for finding build errors etc big integration
issues, with some very rudimentary actual boot checking.

Maybe I'm wrong.

I _wish_ I am wrong.

But honestly, I see problems on my machines most merge windows. Last
release was actually unusually calm, in that I don't think I had to
bisect anything at all.

Which really says to me: "very few people actually _run_ those next trees".

             Linus