Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] FS, MM, and stable trees

[Amir Goldstein]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:56 PM Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Makes sense - e.g. I would like to have a process to make automation
> of the xfstests for proposed patches for stable for cifs.ko easier and
> part of the process (as we already do for cifs/smb3 related checkins
> to for-next ie linux next before sending to mainline for cifs.ko).
> Each filesystem has a different set of xfstests (and perhaps other
> mechanisms) to run so might be very specific to each file system, but
> would be helpful to discuss
>

Agreed.

Perhaps it is just a matter of communicating the stable tree workflow.
I currently only see notice emails from Greg about patches being queued
for stable.

I never saw an email from you or Greg saying, the branch "stable-xxx" is
in review. Please run your tests.

I have seen reports from LTP about stable kernels, so I know it is
being run regularly and I recently saw the set of xfstests configurations
that Sasha and Luis posted.

Is there any publicly available information about which tests are being run
on stable candidate branches?

Thanks,
Amir.