On 29.02.24 22:55, Vegard Nossum wrote: > On 19/02/2024 23:07, Jonathan Corbet wrote: >> Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> Replace the existing brief explanation on bisecting regressions with a >>> text describing the whole process from beginning to end -- while also >>> describing how to validate if a problem is still present in mainline. >>> This "two in one" approach is possible, as checking whenever a bug is in >>> mainline is one of the first steps before performing a bisection anyway >>> and thus described. Due to this approach the text also works quite >>> nicely in conjunction with >>> Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst, as it covers all typical >>> cases where users will need to build a kernel in exactly the same order. >> >> I have scanned over this; don't really have a time to do a detailed >> reading at this point. My overall impression is: it's useful >> information, but I think we're going to overwhelm people. I worry that >> we're replacing a one-page file on how to do a bisect with a 1,900-line >> beast. I suspect there are whole classes of readers who want the new >> stuff, but there are others who would be better served by something much >> more terse. > > My vote would be to include the new document "soon" (perhaps after > Petr's extensive comments have been addressed), I just sent v2 out to enable this, which... > but keep the existing, short document around as well. ...left that document untouched. It will look a bit odd in the index, which is a bit odd, but not a huge problem either I guess. > I also think the best feedback is going to come from users attempting > to use these steps for their real regressions. Once merged, we > (Thorsten or anybody) can attempt to incorporate that feedback in > increments. Yeah, sounds good! Ciao, Thorsten
