* Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> * Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hm, just as background, there are no regression reports I'm aware of
> > > against any of these trees, plus most of the dangerous commits have
> > > been in linux-next for at least two weeks - the majority of them even
> > > longer. The last 2-4 commits of x86/mm are fresher.
> >
> > Side note: I do not believe a lot of people actually run linux-next on
> > laptops, so suspend/resume likely doesn't get a lot of testing in
> > next.
> >
> > I think most people who run linux-next tend to be automation things on
> > farms.
>
> Yeah, so 10af6235e0d3 was in linux-next for over a month, yet no-one reported
> the
> bug.
That was also smack in the middle of the vacation season on the northern
hemisphere, which didn't help testing coverage either I suspect ...
In hindsight it was perhaps not the smartest thing from me to send three major
hw-enablement features to you - although only PCID was the one that should have
real widespread effects, and I did stage those changes pretty conservatively
over
several months. Hindsight is 20/20 ...
Thanks,
Ingo
