On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 05:32:37PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >Hi Sasha, > >On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 6:38 PM, Sasha Levin ><alexander.le...@microsoft.com> wrote: >> Working on AUTOSEL, it became even more obvious to me how difficult it is >> for a >> patch to get a proper review. Maintainers found it difficult to keep up with >> the upstream work for their subsystem, and reviewing additional -stable >> patches >> put even more load on them which some suggested would be more than what they >> can handle. > >Thanks for your work! > >> - For some reason, the odds of a -rc commit to be targetted for -stable is >> over 20%, while for merge window commits it's about 3%. I can't quite >> explain why that happens, but this would suggest that -rc commits end up >> hurting -stable pretty badly. > >Aren't more -rc commits targeted for -stable because they are bugfixes? >Ideally, new features are supposed to be merged during the merge window, >while -rc commits fix bugs.
new features can only be merged during a merge window, bug fixes can be merged at any point. >So they can be categorized like: > 1. Plain -rc commits, What's this exactly? -rc commits are only supposed to fix bugs. > 2. -rc commits fixing a bug: > a. in the same release cycle, > b. in a previous release. > >2a assumes the bug was backported to -stable, too, doesn't it? Bug fixes for features introduced in that release cycle won't be backported to stable. >Do you have statistics for which categories are most buggy? I haven't broken it down to subsystems for a few reasons: - My dataset is based on the Fixes: tag, some subsystems use it less than others. - Maintainers change, so even if one subsystem is being awesome about it today, it might not be the case in a year. - I don't really want to point fingers at a particular subsystem, I think that this is an issue at the kernel level.
