Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758995AbXH0RQ3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:16:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751536AbXH0RQU (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:16:20 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([63.81.120.158]:21531 "EHLO gateway-1237.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751125AbXH0RQU (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:16:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21) From: Daniel Walker To: Andrew Morton Cc: Michal Piotrowski , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Steinbrink , eranian@hpl.hp.com, ak@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Natalie Protasevich In-Reply-To: <20070827094403.40b28836.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1186531609.22044.50.camel@imap.mvista.com> <20070808142059.GF30805@atjola.homenet> <1187628296.7732.14.camel@imap.mvista.com> <46CDE94A.7000600@googlemail.com> <1187904169.2435.83.camel@dhcp193.mvista.com> <46D21E8E.4000003@googlemail.com> <20070827005131.b93f5935.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1188232008.2435.222.camel@dhcp193.mvista.com> <20070827094403.40b28836.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:08:34 -0700 Message-Id: <1188234515.2435.243.camel@dhcp193.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 (2.10.3-2.fc7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1802 Lines: 38 On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 09:44 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > It's a hassle when someone doesn't have a bugzilla account. But there are > humans sitting behind bugzilla handling stuff (fsvo "human"). I've already > forwarded your bugzilla report to Stephane pointing out that he doesn't > have an account. > > I screen 100% of new bugzilla reports and for those which I think need > attention (most), I will ensure that the appropriate parties get to see the > report. I'll also verify that the "regression" state is correct and that > the provided info is sufficient-looking. (It's amazing how many people > have trouble with the "Most recent kernel where this bug did not occur:" > question). When I read that question, it sort of feels like a mind bender. It's the "did not occur" , most people are thinking "which version of the kernel did I find this in", but it's asking the opposite .. For bug #8945 I really don't recall the version of the kernel I ran when it worked .. I had to do a bisect to get some clue about that .. nmi_watchdog isn't something I use every time I boot (I should tho), and I go through lots of kernels .. > What I haven't been doing is ensuring that the Product and Component fields > are suitably set. That's something which Natalie is now cleaning up. In terms of regressions, it would be nice for the "Version" field to be the kernel where the regression first showed up .. Like on bug #8945 I put in 2.6.22 even tho I found the issue in 2.6.23-rc1 .. Is that typically what the "Version" field is used for? Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/