Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C0FC433EF for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 11:41:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244947AbiAJLlJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2022 06:41:09 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51564 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S244875AbiAJLkx (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2022 06:40:53 -0500 Received: from wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8234::]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9511AC06173F; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 03:40:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from ip4d173d02.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([77.23.61.2] helo=[192.168.66.200]); authenticated by wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) id 1n6t2f-000747-Ab; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 12:40:49 +0100 Message-ID: <4398ddfe-9db4-bf67-902d-e0416b815878@leemhuis.info> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 12:40:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.0 Content-Language: en-BS To: Matthias Brugger , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Jonathan Corbet , Randy Dunlap , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Lukas Bulwahn References: <28b56512-d681-4a3a-98f0-a2eae34a217e@suse.com> <1126ce91-f22b-c397-4d1e-13d290a424a5@leemhuis.info> <8e6f07ef-10fe-381c-3a8d-db497492036c@suse.com> From: Thorsten Leemhuis Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/2] docs: add a document about regression handling In-Reply-To: <8e6f07ef-10fe-381c-3a8d-db497492036c@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;linux@leemhuis.info;1641814852;ff1feeda; X-HE-SMSGID: 1n6t2f-000747-Ab Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07.01.22 18:44, Matthias Brugger wrote: > On 07/01/2022 17:51, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> On 07.01.22 16:37, Matthias Brugger wrote: >>> On 07/01/2022 15:21, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>>> Create a document explaining various aspects around regression handling >>>> and tracking both for users and developers. Among others describe the >>>> first rule of Linux kernel development and what it means in practice. >>>> Also explain what a regression actually is and how to report one >>>> properly. The text additionally provides a brief introduction to the >>>> bot >>>> the kernel's regression tracker uses to facilitate his work. To sum >>>> things up, provide a few quotes from Linus to show how serious he takes >>>> regressions. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis >>> [...] >>>> +The important bits for people fixing regressions >>>> +================================================ >>>> + >>>> +When receiving regression reports by mail, check if the reporter CCed >>>> `the >>>> +regression mailing list `_ >>>> +(regressions@lists.linux.dev). If not, forward or bounce the report >>>> to the Linux >>>> +kernel's regression tracker (regressions@leemhuis.info), unless you >>>> plan on >>> >>> I would have expected it to be the same mailing list >>> (regressions@lists.linux.dev), is this a typo maybe? >> >> Thx for taking a look. Hmm. That's possible, but I (and the grep call I >> just ran) fail to spot the typo. >> >> Maybe the wording is to confusing: regressions@lists.linux.dev is the >> list, regressions@leemhuis.info is a dedicated email address I (the >> kernel's regression tracker) use for regression tracking (which reminds >> me: maybe I should ask for a alias like regressions@kernel.org or >> regression-tracker@kernel.org). > > Yes it's the wording then :) > Anyway I just wonder why you we should send the regression to the > regressions email list, but only to the tracker email address. For me > that's the confusing part. I'd expect to send it to the list as well and > the tracker takes it from there. If for any reason someone does not want > to send a regression to the list, then he can send it to the tracker > directly. That's my understanding of how this works. If that's correct > then I'd say we should just explain the difference. You comments made be revisit the section and made me spot a few other issues I found less than ideal. So I rewrote it over the weekend (more than once, to be precise...). I hope this clears things up. ``` The important bits for people fixing regressions ================================================ When submitting fixes for regressions, add "Link:" tags pointing to all places where the issue was reported, as tools like the Linux kernel regression bot 'regzbot' heavily rely on these; these pointers are also of great value for people looking into the issue some time in the future, as explained in `Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst` and :ref:`Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst `:: Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/30th.anniversary.repost@klaava.Helsinki.FI/ Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1234567890 Let the Linux kernel's regression tracker and all other subscribers of the `regression mailing list `_ (regressions@lists.linux.dev) quickly known about newly reported regressions: * When receiving a mailed report that did not CC the list, immediately send at least a brief "Reply-all" with the list CCed to get it into the loop; also ensure its CCed on all future replies, in case it got lost. * If you receive a report from a bug tracker, forward or bounce the report to the list, unless the reporter followed `Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst` instructions and did it already. [Optional] Ensure the Linux kernel regression bot 'regzbot' tracks the issue: * For mailed reports, check if the reporter included a 'regzbot command' like the ``#regzbot introduced v5.13..v5.14-rc1`` described above. If not, send a reply with the regressions list in CC, which includes a paragraph like the following: #regzbot ^introduced v5.13..v5.14-rc1 Note, in this case there is a caret (^) before the `introduced` to make regzbot treat the parent mail (the one you reply to) as the report for the regression you want to see tracked. Instead of specifying a version range you can also state a commit-id, in case the reporter identified the culprit. * When receiving a report from a bug tracker and forwarding it to the regressions list (see above), include a paragraph like this: #regzbot introduced: v5.13..v5.14-rc1 #regzbot from: Some N. Ice Human #regzbot monitor: http://some.bugtracker.example.com/ticket?id=123456789 ``` Note, regzbot does not yet support "#regzbot from" and "#regzbot monitor ", but I wanted to work on that soon anyway -- and this text will likely take weeks before it hits mailine, so this shouldn't be a problem. Ciao, Thorsten