lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next stats (Was: Linux 3.12-rc1)
Hi Nicholas,

On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 17:23:41 -0700 "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 15:50 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 18:08:11 -0400 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > So it's been two weeks, and the merge window for 3.12 is now closed.
> >
> > As usual, the executive friendly graph is at
> > http://neuling.org/linux-next-size.html :-)
> >
> > (No merge commits counted, next-20130903 was the linux-next based on v3.11)
> >
> > Commits in v3.12-rc1 (relative to v3.11): 9474 (v3.11-rc11: 9494)
> > Commits in next-20130903: 8891 (next-20130701: 8929)
> > Commits with the same SHA1: 7991 ( 7670)
> > Commits with the same patch_id: 472 (1) ( 759)
> > Commits with the same subject line: 70 (1) ( 55)
> >
> > (1) not counting those in the lines above.
> >
> > So commits in -rc1 that were "in" next-20130903: 8533 90.1% (8484 89.4%)
> > Commits in -rc1 that were not in next-20120722: 941 9.9% (1010 10.6%
> >
> > So better than last time, but it would be still nice to figure out where
> > the last lot came from. I have the "git log --oneline --no-walk" list if
> > someone wants them.
> >
> > Some breakdown of that list:
> >
> > Top ten first word of commit summary:
> >
> > 57 net
> > 53 mips
> > 49 drm
> > 47 [scsi]
> > 23 perf
> > 23 nfs
> > 20 cifs
> > 19 nvme
> > 18 vfs
> > 17 arm
> >
> > Top ten authors:
> >
> > 33 Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
> > 21 Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org>
> > 20 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> > 18 James Smart <james.smart@emulex.com>
> > 17 Jon Mason <jon.mason@intel.com>
> > 17 Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
> > 16 Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com>
> > 16 Jingoo Han <jg1.han@samsung.com>
> > 15 Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
> > 14 Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
>
> I'm totally confused by these stats..
>
> The target-pending/for-next pull had ~30 commits with the term 'target'
> in the first word of the commit summary, and yours truly had 40 commits
> merged.
>
> Is there a reason why these would not be showing up in the above..?

These are the lists if things that went into Linus' tree but were *not*
in linux-next prior to the merge window opening.

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-18 03:01    [W:1.458 / U:0.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site