On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 1:55 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Witz komm raus, Du bist umzingelt. Please, explain this reference. :-) > The key here is "if nobody complains". I would argue that it is _your_ > responsibility to do those builds, and not the reponsibility of others > to do it for you. Testing allmodconfig for a popular architecture, agreed, it is due diligence to avoid messing -next that day. Testing a matrix of configs * arches * gcc/clang * compiler versions? No, sorry, that is what CI/-next/-rcs are for and that is where the "if nobody complains" comes from. If you think building a set of code for a given arch/config/etc. is particularly important, then it is _your_ responsibility to build it once in a while in -next (as you have done). If it is not that important, somebody will speak up in one -rc. If not, is anyone actually building that code at all? Otherwise, changing core/shared code would be impossible. Please don't blame the author for making a sensible change that will improve code quality for everyone. > But, sure, your call. Please feel free to ignore my report. I'm not ignoring the report, quite the opposite. I am trying to understand why you think reverting is needed for something that has been more than a week in -next without any major breakage and still has a long road to v5.11. Cheers, Miguel
