Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/27] 4.14.94-stable review

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 05:38:34PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
> 
> On 16/01/2019 17:11, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 04:56:08PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
> >>
> >> On 16/01/2019 16:02, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 09:25:12AM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 15/01/2019 16:35, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.94 release.
> >>>>> There are 27 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> >>>>> to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> >>>>> let me know.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Responses should be made by Thu Jan 17 15:48:28 UTC 2019.
> >>>>> Anything received after that time might be too late.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> >>>>> 	https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.14.94-rc1.gz
> >>>>> or in the git tree and branch at:
> >>>>> 	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.14.y
> >>>>> and the diffstat can be found below.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> greg k-h
> >>>> All tests are passing for Tegra ...
> >>>>
> >>>> Test results for stable-v4.14:
> >>>>     8 builds:	8 pass, 0 fail
> >>>>     16 boots:	16 pass, 0 fail
> >>>>     14 tests:	14 pass, 0 fail
> >>>>
> >>>> Linux version:	4.14.94-rc1-gec31b1a
> >>>> Boards tested:	tegra124-jetson-tk1, tegra20-ventana,
> >>>>                 tegra210-p2371-2180, tegra30-cardhu-a04
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for testing two of these.
> >>>
> >>> How about 4.19 and 4.20?  Does modern kernels work on this hardware as
> >>> well?  :)
> >>
> >> We are not that advanced yet ;-)
> > 
> > So not everything for those platforms is upstream?  :(
> 
> No sorry! I really was joking. We have enough upstream to test all these
> platforms (plus a couple more) today :-)
> 
> >> Only joking, absolutely and in fact we have more devices/boards
> >> supported in newer kernels so it would make sense. We are also testing
> >> mainline and -next.
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, it is a bit of a process to add new branches at the
> >> moment simply because we are piggy backing on existing infrastructure
> >> for testing that I personally do not own and so it needs to be approved.
> >> However, nonetheless it is doable.
> >>
> >> We were talking about adding v4.19 and then v4.20 popped up. I am not
> >> sure if you have any ideas yet about the EOL for v4.20? I was just
> >> wondering if we should prioritise v4.20 now over v4.19?
> > 
> > I was just curious, if everything was upstream (like the boards that
> > linaro tests for), then running 4.19 should be just the same as 4.20.
> > But if you have big out-of-tree patchsets, that's a totally different
> > story.
> 
> Yes testing stable-v4.19/v4.20 is straight forward and will work today.
> I just need to go through the process of setting it up and requesting
> this. However, while you were asking, I was curious if you had any idea
> of the projected EOL for stable-v4.20 yet?

Sorry, the EOL for 4.20 will be once 5.0 is out, usually around the
5.0.3 timeframe or such, like any other "normal" stable kernel
lifecycle.

thanks,

greg k-h