ACK: [SRU][J][PATCH v2 0/3] Fix failing net selftests

[Stefan Bader]

On 25.08.23 12:57, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 08:36:13AM +0200, Roxana Nicolescu wrote:
> [...]
>> Let's keep an eye on net:vrf-xfrm-tests.sh results next cycle since the
>> algorithm has changed in the last patch.
>> I personally find it strange to link 2 buglinks in the cover letter, but I
>> also understand why these were submitted together.
>> Maybe a "parent" bug would make sense in this case.
>>
>> Acked-by: Roxana Nicolescu <roxana.nicolescu at canonical.com>
> 
> Though I think it is important to understand the end goal here and be able to
> track its progress, I am not sure launchpad bugs have been used for that much.

That is _exactly_ for what launchpad bugs are used.
> 
> In this particular case, it is about "Adjust tests that use crypto to work in
> FIPS mode", and that task has been broken in subtasks, like "adjust TLS socket
> tests", "adjust xfrm tests", etc.
> 
> So Magali created those two bugs for each of the subtasks and submitted them as
> a single cover letter. That didn't get in the way of me reviewing them and
> understand why they are for. The cover letter suits it fine. Our tooling even
> manages commits having two BugLinks or a BugLink plus a CVE when producing
> changelogs.

However when patches are applied, we set them manually applied in the 
tracking bug. And when a kernels releases launchpad automatically set 
fixed release.
The problematic part might be if something comes up and requires 
undoing. Then the complete submission might be reverted even if only one 
part caused a problem.
> 
> My points are: 1) let's not introduce further paperwork to get patches reviewed
> and applied, Magali did a stelar job in her submission here, not only in
> writing the cover letter, but all work that I believe was behind it (specially
> testing).

This is through and will get applied in time. And not to say Magali did 
not a great job. Just that it could also  have used less paperwork by 
having one bug to say "fix selftests under fips" or so.

> 
> 2) If any tracking of tasks is necessary, we have different tools to deal with
> that. Let's use them, but not let them meddle with how we submit and review
> patches.

This is SRU policy. And it is there to make things manageable. This is a 
simple case but next time there will be a submission fixing 15 different 
graphic bugs under one submission and likely only 10 bug reports. And 
this is why we try to keep people to one submission for one goal and 
linked to one bug report.
> 
> Cascardo.
> 

-- 
- Stefan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0xE8675DEECBEECEA3.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 44613 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/attachments/20230825/4441132f/attachment-0001.key>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/attachments/20230825/4441132f/attachment-0001.sig>