Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 2013-07-12 at 08:22 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Listen to yourself. In fact, there is a damn good solution": don't
> mark crap for stable, and don't send crap to me after -rc4.
> 

I tend to hold things off after -rc4 because you scare me more than Greg
does ;-)


Actually, as I consider tracing a second class citizen, the things that
I tend not to send you, but instead mark for stable, are things that can
cause events to be dropped, or just incorrect trace data. Like a
tracepoint saying preemption is off when it is enabled. If I find a bug
that can cause some minor incorrect trace data to occur, and its after
-rc4, I tend to just mark it with a stable tag and wait for the merge
window to occur. I don't mean regressions either. Usually, the incorrect
data comes from something new for that release, or something that's been
there forever (like commit 11034ae9c20f4057a6127fc965906417978e69b2).

Should those be sent to you late in the game as well? 

For the 3.11 merge window, I had quite a bit of stable tags, but those
were commits that I would have sent to you but they were found very
late, and by the time I was satisfied with the test output, you had
already opened the window.

-- Steve


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/