Thread (24 messages) 24 messages, 4 authors, 2022-03-29

Re: [PATCH net 09/13] docs: netdev: make the testing requirement more stringent

From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Date: 2022-03-28 17:52:00
Also in: bpf, linux-doc

On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 18:42:59 +0200 Andrew Lunn wrote:
quoted
 What level of testing is expected before I submit my change?
 ------------------------------------------------------------
-If your changes are against ``net-next``, the expectation is that you
-have tested by layering your changes on top of ``net-next``.  Ideally
-you will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a
-minimum, your changes should survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an
-``allmodconfig`` build without new warnings or failures.
+At the very minimum your changes must survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an
+``allmodconfig`` build with ``W=1`` set without new warnings or failures.  
Doesn't the patchwork buildbot also have C=1 ? You have been pointing
out failures for C=1, so it probably should be documented here.
We have a number of cases where C=1 failures are false positives. 
Sparse is not getting much love these days, unfortunately.
I didn't want to force people to bend over backwards to fix stuff
we can let fly upstream. I can't think of a case where W=1 was okay.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help