From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C71288AF for ; Sun, 4 May 2014 11:19:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.65]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8CFD201F4 for ; Sun, 4 May 2014 11:19:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53662254.9060100@huawei.com> Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 19:19:48 +0800 From: Li Zefan MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: lizf.kern@gmail.com Subject: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] stable issues List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , I've been dealing with stable kernels. There are some issues that I noticed and may be worth discussing. - Too many LTS kernels? 2.6.32 Willy Tarreau 3.2 Ben Huchings 3.4 Greg 3.10 Greg 3.12 Jiry Slaby Too many or not? Is it good or bad? One of the problem is the maintenance burden. For example, DaveM has to prepare stable patches for 5 stable kernels: 3.2, 3.4, 3.10, 3.12 and 3.14. - Equip Greg with a sub-maintainer? I found 3.4.x lacked hundreds of fixes compared to 3.2.x. It's mainly because Ben has been manually backporting patches which don't apply cleanly, while Greg just doesn't have the time budget. Is it possible that we find a sub-maintainer to do this work? - Are there still sub-systems/maintainers not doing very good in stable stuff? Once I looked into "git log --no-merges v3.4.. kernel/sched/rt.c", out of 22 commits, only 2 fixes have stable tag, and finally I backported 4 commits to 3.4.x. - Add a known_issues.txt? There are stable rules to what patch is acceptable, and besides a maintainer may decide not send a fix for stable for some reason, or an issue is taken care by no one. So how about add a known_issues.txt, then anyone who needs to bulid his own kernel based on LTS may find it useful. - Testing stable kernels The testing of stable kernels when a new version is under review seems quite limited. We have Dave's Trinity and Fengguang's 0day, but they are run on mainline/for-next only. Would be useful to also have them run on stable kernels?