<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/">
</head>
<body><span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:mark.a.janes@intel.com" title="Mark Janes <mark.a.janes@intel.com>"> <span class="fn">Mark Janes</span></a>
</span> changed
<a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [REGRESSION] [BISECTED] [GLESCTS] race between destruction of types and shader compilation (?)"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110796">bug 110796</a>
<br>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
<tr>
<th>What</th>
<th>Removed</th>
<th>Added</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">CC</td>
<td>
</td>
<td>jasuarez@igalia.com
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Summary</td>
<td>[REGRESSION] [BISECTED] race between destruction of types and shader compilation (?)
</td>
<td>[REGRESSION] [BISECTED] [GLESCTS] race between destruction of types and shader compilation (?)
</td>
</tr></table>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [REGRESSION] [BISECTED] [GLESCTS] race between destruction of types and shader compilation (?)"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110796#c10">Comment # 10</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [REGRESSION] [BISECTED] [GLESCTS] race between destruction of types and shader compilation (?)"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110796">bug 110796</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:mark.a.janes@intel.com" title="Mark Janes <mark.a.janes@intel.com>"> <span class="fn">Mark Janes</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>In my opinion, this should have blocked the 19.1 release.
I'm altering the title to make it clear that this prevents i965 from being
compliant with the gles cts.
Intel CI is an effective sieve for unfixed bisected regressions, and prevents
them from going out in a release. However bugs (like this one) which are not
seen in CI have no mechanism that ensures they block the next release.
The bug originator is unlikely to remember that the bug is unfixed and add it
to the release tracker. The release manager may search in bugzilla for unfixed
bugs affecting the release, but will find a lot of noise in the results.
Juan, do you have any suggestions for how we can catch these bugs in the
release process? I would suggest relying on the "bisected, regression"
keywords, but this list seems too long for me:
<a href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&keywords=bisected%2C%20regression%2C%20&keywords_type=allwords&list_id=676302&order=bug_id%20DESC&product=Mesa&query_format=advanced">https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&keywords=bisected%2C%20regression%2C%20&keywords_type=allwords&list_id=676302&order=bug_id%20DESC&product=Mesa&query_format=advanced</a>
We should be marking some of those bugs as WONTFIX etc.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>