• Thorsten Leemhuis's avatar
    docs: *-regressions.rst: explain how quickly issues should be handled · d2b40ba2
    Thorsten Leemhuis authored
    Add a section with a few rules of thumb about how
    quickly developers should address regressions to
    Documentation/process/handling-regressions.rst; additionally,
    add a short paragraph about this to the companion document
    Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.rst as well.
    
    The rules of thumb were written after studying the quotes from Linus
    found in handling-regressions.rst and especially influenced by
    statements like "Users are literally the _only_ thing that matters" and
    "without users, your program is not a program, it's a pointless piece of
    code that you might as well throw away". The author interpreted those in
    perspective to how the various Linux kernel series are maintained
    currently and what those practices might mean for users running into a
    regression on a small or big kernel update.
    
    That for example lead to the paragraph starting with "Aim to get fixes
    for regressions mainlined within one week after identifying the culprit,
    if the regression was introduced in a stable/longterm release or the
    devel cycle for the latest mainline release". Some might see this as
    pretty high bar, but on the other hand something like that is needed to
    not leave users out in the cold for too long -- which can quickly happen
    when updating to the latest stable series, as the previous one is
    normally stamped "End of Life" about three or four weeks after a new
    mainline release. This makes a lot of users switch during this
    timeframe. Any of them thus risk running into regressions not promptly
    fixed; even worse, once the previous stable series is EOLed for real,
    users that face a regression might be left with only three options:
    
     (1) continue running an outdated and thus potentially insecure kernel
         version from an abandoned stable series
    
     (2) run the kernel with the regression
    
     (3) downgrade to an earlier longterm series still supported
    
    This is better avoided, as (1) puts users and their data in danger, (2)
    will only be possible if it's a minor regression that doesn't interfere
    with booting or serious usage, and (3) might be regression itself or
    impossible on the particular machine, as the users might require drivers
    or features only introduced after the latest longterm series branched
    of.
    
    In the end this lead to the aforementioned "Aim to fix regression within
    one week" part. It's also the reason for the "Try to resolve any
    regressions introduced in the current development cycle before its
    end.".
    Signed-off-by: default avatarThorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>
    CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
    Acked-by: default avatarGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
    Reviewed-by: default avatarLukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
    Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/a7b717b52c0d54cdec9b6daf56ed6669feddee2c.1644994117.git.linux@leemhuis.infoSigned-off-by: default avatarJonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
    d2b40ba2
reporting-regressions.rst 22.1 KB