[Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Bug-introducing patches

[Daniel Vetter]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 5:43 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds at linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> (Side note: I think it's improving even on the hardware side. I think
> the i915 people must be running a _lot_ more testing before pushing to
> me, because while GPU issues used to be one of the areas that was one
> of the common causes, and it really hasn't been that lately).

We run a _lot_ more before even pushing to linux-next :-) I think
rule-of-thumb is that pre-merge we burn down one machine-week on every
patch series when it gets posted (every time it gets posted), and
post-merge that goes up to about a machine-month. Of course repeated
plenty of times - I think we do a handful of the one-month runs each
week, and about 20 of the one-week runs per day.

Pretty much all the things that do still slip through are for features
we haven't figured out how to test in a fully automated way (some
obscure display features - we e.g. _do_ have fully automated rigs for
hotplug testing). Everywhere else coverage is pretty awesome, because
we have lots of tests and lots of different machines.

Aside: We also subject linux-next to the same torture, so we know how
many machines will die when we pull in -rc1. It's hard to tell,
because lots of noise in the data, but I think overall system
stability of linux-next has improved. And I think it's been a while
since we last catched someone pushing untested patches to linux-next
that failed on our entire farm :-)
-Daniel
---
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch