Re: what trees/branches to test on syzbot

[Guenter Roeck]

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:58 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Guenter Roeck <groeck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Several people proposed that linux-next should not be tested on
>>> syzbot. While some people suggested that it needs to test as many
>>> trees as possible. I've initially included linux-next as it is a
>>> staging area before upstream tree, with the intention that patches are
>>> _tested_ there, is they are not tested there, bugs enter upstream
>>> tree. And then it takes much longer to get fix into other trees.
>>>
>>> So the question is: what trees/branches should be tested? Preferably
>>> in priority order as syzbot can't test all of them.
>>>
>>
>> I always thought that -next existed specifically to give people a
>> chance to test the code in it. Maybe the question is where to report
>> the test results ?
>
> FTR, from Guenter on another thread:
>
>> Interesting. Assuming that refers to linux-next, not linux-net, that
>> may explain why linux-next tends to deteriorate. I wonder if I should
>> drop it from my testing as well. I'll be happy to follow whatever the
>> result of this exchange is and do the same.
>
> If we agree on some list of important branches, and what branches
> specifically should not be tested with automatic reporting, I think it
> will benefit everybody.
> +Fengguang, can you please share your list and rationale behind it?

https://github.com/fengguang/lkp-tests, more specifically
https://github.com/fengguang/lkp-tests/tree/master/repo/linux

Guenter