[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] stable kernel stuff and grumpy maintainers
davej at redhat.com
Wed Jun 20 15:14:33 UTC 2012
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:37:01AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> Many of the patches I backport are performance related. Some are throughput
> or latency style fixes and others are interactivity related particularly
> when IO is involved. These are not "critical". In some cases there are
> multiple patches required and that falls foul of the "It must fix only
> one thing." rule.
> Hence, if I discover something really bad and fix it in mainline then I tag
> it for -stable. However, I was not reposting patches for -stable that fixed
> more subtle issues because they were not critical, just desirable.
As you mention these are not critical, and mm/vfs/block seem to be historically
fragile areas that are easy to introduce regressions into.
We never get Fedora bugs like "mmap got 5% slower". We get "I get this weird oops sometimes".
Fedora users are a different breed to say RHEL/SLES/LTS users, but that's a separate
problem that needs solving not through stable.
The only exception I'd give is if the performance difference was huge, and
impacted a lot of users.
Also, given the number of patches that goes into the first few stable releases
once Linus opens up for merges, I suspect changing this rule would make the
patch-bombs even more unreviewable.
More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss