On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 9:29 PM Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 06, 2024 at 12:04:45PM GMT, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > But build and boot testing? All those random configs, all those odd > > architectures, and all those odd compilers *do* affect build testing. > > So you as a filesystem maintainer should *not* generally strive to do > > your own basic build test, but very much participate in the generic > > build test that is being done by various bots (not just on linux-next, > > but things like the 0day bot on various patch series posted to the > > list etc). > > > > End result: one size does not fit all. But I get unhappy when I see > > some subsystem that doesn't seem to participate in what I consider the > > absolute bare minimum. > > So the big issue for me has been that with the -next/0day pipeline, I > have no visibility into when it finishes; which means it has to go onto > my mental stack of things to watch for and becomes yet another thing to > pipeline, and the more I have to pipeline the more I lose track of > things. FWIW, my understanding is that linux-next is not just infrastructure for CI bots. For example, there is also tooling based on -next that doesn't have such a thing as "done with processing" - my understanding is that syzkaller (https://syzkaller.appspot.com/upstream) has instances that fuzz linux-next ("ci-upstream-linux-next-kasan-gce-root").
