On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 05:12:05PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > "Tested-by:" tags would be more helpful if the test > cases that were used were somehow sent along with the > signature. > To me, that seems either a perverse, or else a bureaucratic, interpretation of what should go where.
Tested-by is usually used for a fix of some problem, often a regression. A good commit message will explain the problem. I have recently offered this tag in two cases - in the first case it did not boot without the fix, in the second it did not wake up from suspend. In each case, only one of my boxes was affected. Do you think I should have insisted that some of my lspci -V information was appended to the commit (they both affected the radeon code) if my tag was going to be added ? This is _often_ not like userspace programs where you can write a testsuite to exercise the corner cases. Kernel problems can be tied up with intricate details of the hardware, or equally they might happen only for certain usage, and for those it might not be at all obvious what is "special" about the affected usage. ĸen -- Nanny Ogg usually went to bed early. After all, she was an old lady. Sometimes she went to bed as early as 6 a.m. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
