Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/31] implement atomic_fetch_$op

[Fengguang Wu]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 09:35:06PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> >> OK, weirdness. I received the "BUILD SUCCESS" email without any arm64
> >> builds listed, but I just received a build bot email telling me the
> >> arm64 build was borked (which I know it is).
> >
> > Sorry, that may happen because even though most errors will be
> > detected in the first hour or before the BUILD SUCCESS/DONE
> > notification, the build/boot/performance tests for a particular branch
> > may continue for days, during the time test coverage keeps growing.
> > Which means it's possible to receive a build failure after receiving
> > BUILD SUCCESS notification.
> >
> > In particular, 0-day bot classify 500+ kconfigs into 2 priority lists:
> >
> > P1: 100+ realtime priority kconfigs which should be finished before sending
> >     out BUILD SUCCESS notification
> >
> > P2: 400+ background priority kconfigs which may take hours to days to finish
> >
> > That split is a tradeoff between timeliness and completeness. It turns
> > out to work well as long as we choose the suitable P1 list.
> >
> > So the more accurate interpretation of "BUILD SUCCESS/DONE" would be:
> > 0day bot is working on your tree (no worry about out-of-service) and
> > reached a major milestone.
> 
> Thanks, this is very useful information. But would it be also possible
> to get a report about the P2 completion (or failure)?

Good question! I'm not sure people would care (or even be confused)
about a report that arrive after days, however based on some statistic
data we may find the suitable time to wait for possible error reports.

The past reports show that about 60% errors are reported in 2 hours,
90% errors are reported in 24 hours and there are 1% errors reported
after 1 week.

So developers may reasonably wait for 1 day before sending out patches.

Thanks,
Fengguang