Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:04:56 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.6.21 |
| |
IMO, the closer you look, the more warts you find. Before you starting doing your work with kernel regressions, no one was really tracking it. I bet you have helped cut down on the regressions, but I have no good way to quantify my gut feeling.
Additional comments on developers and fixing regressions:
* Sometimes seeing a long list, peoples' eyes glaze over. Its just human nature. A long list also gives us no idea of scale, or severity. I bet a weekly "top 10 bugs and regressions" email would help focus developer attention.
* To be effective, lists, either long or top-10, must be pruned if you get a sense that only one user is affected. [With oopses and BUGs as a clear exception,] many problems benefit from at least two users reporting a bug.
* It gets a bit tiresome to field the large number of driver bug reports that eventually turn out to be related to broken interrupt handling somehow. I think we developers need to get better at showing users how to isolate driver vs. PCI/ACPI/core bugs. Maybe drivers need to start introducing interrupt delivery tests into their probe code. Overall, broken interrupt handling manifests in several ways, most of which initially appear symptomatic of a broken driver.
Jeff
- 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/
| |