Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.14 015/161] printk: Add console owner and waiter logic to load balance console writes

[Pavel Machek]

On Tue 2018-04-17 16:19:35, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 05:55:49PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> >On Tue 17-04-18 13:31:51, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> We may be able to guesstimate the 'regression chance', but there's no
> >> way we can guess the 'annoyance' once. There are so many different use
> >> cases that we just can't even guess how many people would get "annoyed"
> >> by something.
> >
> >As a maintainer, I hope I have reasonable idea what are common use cases
> >for my subsystem. Those I cater to when estimating 'annoyance'. Sure I don't
> >know all of the use cases so people doing unusual stuff hit more bugs and
> >have to report them to get fixes included in -stable. But for me this is a
> >preferable tradeoff over the risk of regression so this is the rule I use
> >when tagging for stable. Now I'm not a -stable maintainer and I fully agree
> >with "those who do the work decide" principle so pick whatever patches you
> >think are appropriate, I just wanted explain why I don't think more patches
> >in stable are necessarily good.
> 
> The AUTOSEL story is different for subsystems that don't do -stable, and
> subsystems that are actually doing the work (like yourself).
> 
> I'm not trying to override active maintainers, I'm trying to help them
> make decisions.

Ok, cool. Can you exclude LED subsystem, Hibernation and Nokia N900
stuff from autosel work?

									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature