Lines Matching refs:t

7 *We don't cause regressions* -- this document describes what this "first rule of
110 You don't need to do anything special when submitting fixes for regression, just
191    dangerous way to fix a regression. Don't worry about mainlining a fixed
336 introduced`` command outlined above; if they don't do that, someone else can
381 The bot is meant to track regressions, hence please don't involve regzbot for
390 use cases and thus might be noticed by users; hence, please don't involve
443        #regzbot invalid: wasn't a regression, problem has always existed
474         - we don't cause regressions
497        avoid them. Maybe we can't practically support the hardware any more
506        Behavioral changes happen, and maybe we don't even support some
508        are printed out as zeroes, simply because they don't even *exist* in
520        have a "upgrade in place" model. We don't have a "upgrade with new
535        way", and I simply don't think that's acceptable outside of very early
537        up for. The kernel hasn't been in that situation for the last two
559        No amount of "you shouldn't have used this" or "that behavior was
565        that may break user space. But even then the rule is that we don't
570        doesn't make for too much trouble for users (ie "ok, there are a
581        stability" are entirely wrong. API's don't matter either. You can make
592        And our regression rule has never been "behavior doesn't change".
599        So clearly behavior changes all the time and we don't consider that a
604        X, now I can't".
634        So bugs simply aren't even relevant to the discussion. They happen,
643        the point. As far as the USER was concerned, it wasn't buggy - it
647        maybe it worked because the user didn't notice - again, it doesn't
661        don't break users". Because "I fixed a bug" is absolutely NOT AN
663        MUCH BIGGER bug by "fixing" something that the user clearly didn't
671        upgrade random other tools that I don't even care about as I develop
693        And if binaries don't use the interface to parse the format (or just
700        I don't understand why this simple logic is so hard for some kernel
706        simply doesn't matter.
709        issues that way. There aren't that many of them.
737        What's instructive about it is that I reverted a commit that wasn't
746        regressions" kernel rule means. The reverted commit didn't change any
747        API's, and it didn't introduce any new bugs. But it ended up exposing
753        The problem was really pre-existing, and it just didn't happen to