Re: Thorsten is tracking regression again and could need a little help (was: Re: Linux 5.15)

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 02:34:21PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 01.11.21 14:03, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 01:44:01PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >> On 01.11.21 13:33, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 05:49:40AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >>>> example by simply forwarding the mail to regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or
> >>>> CCing that address on a reply. I'll handle everything else then and tell
> >>>> regzbot about it. But if you feel adventurous, you can also skip me as
> >>>> the man-in-the-middle and tell the bot directly. To do that, just send a
> >>>> reply to the report to the regressions mailing list
> >>>> (regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) either directly or by CCing it on a reply
> >>>> you would have written anyway; when doing so, place something like
> >>>> '#regzbot ^introduced v5.15..' (separated by blank lines) somewhere in
> >>>> the text, as outlined in regzbot's 'getting started guide' or its
> >>>> reference documentation:
> >>>> https://gitlab.com/knurd42/regzbot/-/blob/main/docs/getting_started.md
> >>>> https://gitlab.com/knurd42/regzbot/-/blob/main/docs/reference.md
> >>>>
> >>>> That's it, regzbot then on its next run will add the report to the list
> >>>> of tracked regression. I'll keep an eye on things and try to fix any
> >>>> problems I notice, as there likely will be a few. But then doesn't need
> >>>> to bother you.
> >>>>
> >>>> There is one thing that would really help: if one or two subsystem
> >>>> maintainers could give regzbot a shot for all the regression reports
> >>>> they get, even for easy fixes, as the bot really needs something to chew
> >>>> on. Any volunteers?
> >>>
> >>> I'll try it for the USB subsystem this merge cycle. 
> >>
> >> That will be a great help, many thx.
> >>
> >>> Do you want a bug
> >>> report email redirected to that address or will a simple forward work
> >>> well enough?
> >>
> >> Redirecting will make it a little easier for me, but a simple forward is
> >> fine, too.
> > 
> > Ok, I did that now for a USB bug report, hopefully that worked.  If not,
> > I can forward it on.
> 
> Got it, but I could need some advice on it if you have a minute.
> 
> Does that report really look like a regression from your point of view?
> The part "The code has been this way in the kernel for a very long time,
> which suggests that it has been working, [...]" sounds like it is, but
> OTOH it's quite vague.

Later in the thread it was determined that this is a regression that
showed up in the 3.4 kernel release and the commit id was referenced.

> I'm asking, because with my regression tracking work and regzbot I focus
> on regressions and ignore things that were always broken, as I (at least
> for now) don't want it to become yet another bug tracker (and I guess I
> would quickly drown in bugs as well).

I agree, this shouldn't be a bug tracker, sorry, I shouldn't have
started this with a report of a really old issue, but it's all I found
at short notice :)

I've found another report of a regression that is newer for USB and
bounced it to you as well.  Hopefully that is a bit easier to track.

thanks,

greg k-h