On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:57:54PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: >Actually I was careful enough to include only commits that got merged as >part of the stable process into 4.14.x but got later reverted in 4.14.y. >That's where the 0.4% number came from. So I believe all of those cases >(13 in absolute numbers) were user visible regressions during the stable >process. I looked at them, and there are 2 things in play here: - Quite a few of those reverts are because of the PTI work. I'm not sure how we treat it, but yes - it skews statistics here. - 2 of them were reverts for device tree changes for a device that didn't exist in 4.14, and shouldn't have had any user visible changes.
