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

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

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?  :(

> 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.

thanks,

greg k-h