Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190212170012.GF69686@sasha-vm> <CAH2r5mviqHxaXg5mtVe30s2OTiPW2ZYa9+wPajjzz3VOarAUfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOQ4uxjMYWJPF8wFF_7J7yy7KCdGd8mZChfQc5GzNDcfqA7UAA@mail.gmail.com> <20190213073707.GA2875@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190213073707.GA2875@kroah.com>
From:   Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Feb 2019 11:01:25 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxgQGCSbhppBfhHQmDDXS3TGmgB4m=Vp3nyyWTFiyv6z6g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] FS, MM, and stable trees
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>, Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
        lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:37 AM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 09:20:00AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > I never saw an email from you or Greg saying, the branch "stable-xxx" is
> > in review. Please run your tests.
>
> That is what my "Subject: [PATCH 4.9 000/137] 4.9.156-stable review"
> type emails are supposed to kick off.  They are sent both to the stable
> mailing list and lkml.
>
> This message already starts the testing systems going for a number of
> different groups out there, do you want to be added to the cc: list so
> you get them directly?
>

No thanks, I'll fix my email filters ;-)

I think the main difference between these review announcements
and true CI is what kind of guaranty you get for a release candidate
from NOT getting a test failure response, which is one of the main
reasons that where holding back xfs stable fixes for so long.

Best effort testing in timely manner is good, but a good way to
improve confidence in stable kernel releases is a publicly
available list of tests that the release went through.

Do you have any such list of tests that you *know* are being run,
that you (or Sasha) run yourself or that you actively wait on an
ACK from a group before a release?

Thanks,
Amir.