Re: [PATCH 3.14 000/158] 3.14.3-stable review

[Guenter Roeck]

On 05/04/2014 01:27 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 10:19:25AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 05/04/2014 08:38 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.14.3 release.
> > > There are 158 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 Tue May  6 15:38:47 UTC 2014.
> > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> >
> > Build results:
> > 	total: 127 pass: 121 skipped: 4 fail: 2
> >
> > Qemu tests all passed.
> >
> > Additional failure is from new build target unicore32:defconfig, which fails
> > in all releases. The second failure is powerpc:allmodconfig which, together
> > with powerpc:allyesconfig, fails to build in 3.14 and later kernels.
> > Results are therefore as expected.
> >
> > Details are available at http://server.roeck-us.net:8010/builders.
>
> If unicore32 doesn't build on any kernel version, should we just drop
> the whole arch?

Idea was to put the maintainer on notice. If nothing changes, that
may be a good idea.

> I'd suggest the same for powerpc, but odds are, there are still users :)
Yes, the company paying my salary, for example :-). But then if failure to build
allmodconfig/allyesconfig is a criteria, arm would be a prime target as well ...

Might be a discussion point for the kernel summit, though: What are criteria
for an architecture to be accepted, and for it to remain in the kernel ?
Availability of a pre-built tool set (score drops out)? defconfig build
failure (unicore32 be gone) ? Something else ?

Guenter

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/