Re: [GIT PULL v2] Block fixes for 5.7-rc5

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 6:33 PM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Let's try this again... BFQ was missing a header, I fixed that up.

The fix looked trivial to me. That wasn't what worries me.

Why did you send me something that was clearly NOT TESTED AT ALL.

If it hadn't even gotten build-testing, what _did_ it get?

The fact that it now builds doesn't make me much happier.

Why should I believe that this clearly totally untested pull request
is now any good?

Why should I believe that your _future_ pull requests are any good,
when they clearly have absolutely _zero_ testing at all?

Jens, in case you didn't catch on, this is a BIG PROBLEM.

Sending me completely untested crap is a bigger deal than "let's just
polish the crap until it at least compiles".

What have you done to make sure this doesn't happen again?

             Linus



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux