Received: by 2002:ac0:946b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j40csp105541imj; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 05:29:46 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IawoyxzOj2cZ0TPgJ+fPWnj5yW10UZK56wZ8ZXv0dWwf4II9+I90y0jQtQ1MR5x4lkhLRDF X-Received: by 2002:a63:2d6:: with SMTP id 205mr525388pgc.180.1550064586779; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 05:29:46 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1550064586; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=YaNR2M76BvCAvaHUfGgWosWTGYATJEu27JCZfbIUjCVg3pnKRM4yZTDYcJXWDijOa4 p2erpe3kKNLNlgKGdGBnZNqB47mtpjuLA9U9eXd4sFguy+FOtncsQOl4kgU/hd1CyDyY 372jypje0YeOxQPeqAUyU7uiIHttrjmNAhajr9znvbm+4SqzJ/Ma8JlPnltmG8KVF2uA mH5WPEsqm67NkTFl80IMhKqi0Yyp+AByfzubP9nmgm+cnO5VCq4xEdPhc9zGJhHUXDtK 3ov+S9ucu4PAhTLr8njkpsdxr49kUHDOAd5G0meL+5/X+fSmI02PY8vyj/XBjqADt1ya DvNg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=ezC/cSIEOi9TZhW/zhe4OwXuUzMJ8JGy1VtqvyP7VJI=; b=UyWlC5P3+Ym5L82Yf+ElJprRAa/0lbb+PTngKu2taqy7twUchQiG/y7SzrqWOf+e2R eNeltj12lE5nsX42LHIaGhffweB8XPXEXpNxf2K/U8ZLBA+b5393ela3p5HZ0uzTzrOK 3Xtr06TvfP8/Upq+RDL5oOdFM2a0rUCEcZr1WLKvjE4mq4knvSANwwaHzm/Dc/qjWY7S QBDWztNN3y4F82BgKOlQNCg4WtqiTVyFSWAAi0nz8Gw9bo1hoNgFaORph/eeRuGRI2yi XAkogI4d1kJ/2jXGKDwMPGZfGtKQYGxIFy9gYLW9EfGvkGtr4pCG/ei2gm2lgN8UWOdG OjKg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=aJBR3p8U; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id o8si421303pgn.469.2019.02.13.05.29.27; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 05:29:46 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=aJBR3p8U; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730723AbfBMJSG (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 04:18:06 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:59532 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728468AbfBMJSG (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 04:18:06 -0500 Received: from localhost (5356596B.cm-6-7b.dynamic.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 286E8222BE; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:18:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550049485; bh=OBwtMif6U+gAaRqAxV3AgL7zafK6ORpn+3ToEs1jewg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=aJBR3p8UeaFYq4Y9hKmUYhWwNBpI/rhmNsqsWY5DyLtM70GEH2zsy934/UJrWt0UQ YlRgwty3vJMnXJEYcGPMOCe90hxSs6XnD2eriPsByXASy9gNMWSFhdXkTRVXQc8CVi P6OKqoUYaAOb5ywdBMwvzWG5uev3p2PZSm37lpAE= Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 10:18:03 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Steve French , Sasha Levin , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , LKML , "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] FS, MM, and stable trees Message-ID: <20190213091803.GA2308@kroah.com> References: <20190212170012.GF69686@sasha-vm> <20190213073707.GA2875@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:01:25AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > 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. That's not true, I know to wait for some responses before doing a release of these kernels. > 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. We have that, you aren't noticing them... > 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? Yes, look at the responses to those messages from Guenter, Shuah, Jon, kernel.ci, Red Hat testing, the Linaro testing teams, and a few other testers that come and go over time. Those list out all of the tests that are being run, and the results of those tests. I also get a number of private responses from different build systems from companies that don't want to post in public, which is fine, I understand the issues involved with that. I would argue that the stable releases are better tested than Linus's releases for that reason alone :) thanks, greg k-h