Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:40:29 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:


* Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Do you believe that our response to bug reports is adequate?

Do you feel that making us feel and look like *** helps?

That doesn't answer my question.

See, first we need to work out whether we have a problem. If we do
this, then we can then have a think about what to do about it.

I tried to convince the 2006 KS attendees that we have a problem and I
resoundingly failed. People seemed to think that we're doing OK.

We were a minority.

But it appears that data such as this contradicts that belief.

This is not a minor matter. If the kernel _is_ slowly deteriorating
then this won't become readily apparent until it has been happening
for a number of years. By that stage there will be so much work to do
to get us back to an acceptable level that it will take a huge effort.
And it will take a long time after that for the kerel to get its
reputation back.

So it is important that we catch deterioration *early* if it is
happening.


[agree with most of Ingo's moaning]

(and this is in no way directed at the networking folks - it holds for
all of us. I have one main complaint about networking: the separate
netdev list is a bad idea - networking regressions should be discussed
and fixed on lkml, like most other subsystems are. Any artificial split
of the lk discussion space is bad.)

but here I disagree. LKML is already too busy and noisy.
Major subsystems need their own discussion areas.

---
~Randy
-
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/