lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/31] cpumask: Documentation

* Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:

> > IMHO, an infrastructure change of this magnitude should absolutely
> > be done via the Git space. This needs a ton of testing and needs
> > bisection, a real Git track record, etc.
>
> Not yet. Committing untested patches into git is the enemy of
> bisection; if one of my patches breaks an architecture, they lose the
> ability to bisect until its fixed. If it's a series of patches, we
> can go back and fix it.

while the initial series might be rebased once or twice, beyond the 1-2
days of initial integration and testing i dont think that's true, and
i'm doing up to 3-4 bisections a day just fine, on an append-mostly
tree.

if you have trouble turning a Git tree into a bisectable tree then your
testing-fu is not strong enough ;-)

[ the only plausible danger is to architectures that are not used by
testers all that much (so that breakages can linger a lot longer
unnoticed) - but why should the other 99% of Linux users be put at a
disadvantage for them. ]

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-10-02 11:35    [W:1.979 / U:0.776 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site