Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751295AbeAPJ7B (ORCPT + 1 other); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 04:59:01 -0500 Received: from mail-io0-f193.google.com ([209.85.223.193]:39250 "EHLO mail-io0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750816AbeAPJ6z (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 04:58:55 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBovx1fcSZWdZKLqAHRqVJRA6pgiovXU6CMm8rc0TKyJXhworvUUGT27jCpIEunw2rabkSHxO3BVF2DLxZ1xhpjE= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20180104092552.GA991@amd> <1515058705.7875.25.camel@gmx.de> <20180104095628.GA4407@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <87inchsl4h.fsf@xmission.com> <87efmrt6ul.fsf@xmission.com> <20180116071225.GJ8249@thunk.org> From: Guenter Roeck Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 01:58:53 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: LKML admins (syzbot emails are not delivered) To: Dmitry Vyukov Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" , "Eric W. Biederman" , Pavel Machek , Mike Galbraith , LKML , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , syzkaller Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:56 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:52 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: >>>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 10:38:42AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Sometimes the branches on linux-next are experimental crap. If someone >>>>> adds an experimental memory allocator to linux-next before discovering >>>>> it causes all kinds of problems I don't want bug reports about my code >>>>> not being able to allocate memory because the memory allocator was bad. >>>>> >>>>> If you don't have the resources to test the individual branches of >>>>> linux-next please just test Linus's tree. That will be much more >>>>> meaningful and productive. >>>> >>>> I have to agree with Eric here, the reason why Fengguang Wu's 0-day >>>> testing robot is much better received by developers is that he does >>>> not test linux-net, >>> >> >> Interesting. Assuming that refers to linux-next, not linux-net, that >> may explain why linux-next tends to deteriorate. I wonder if I should >> drop it from my testing as well. I'll be happy to follow whatever the >> result of this exchange is and do the same. >> >> Guenter >> >>> I will remove linux-next if there is a general agreement that it's not >>> useful. Though, I've heard different opinions from kernel developers >>> as well. I will write a separate email asking what branches should be >>> tested. > > Let's please move discussion of this topic to "what trees/branches to > test on syzbot" thread. This thread is now about too many things. > Hope you don't mind if I repost your last email there. Sure, go ahead. Guenter