On 2023-12-22 13:26, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 01:16:41PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Oliver, should your tree be in -next?
No, we don't have the KVM/arm64 fixes in -next.
I see it's not, I'm asking if it should be - given the latencies
involved it seems like it'd be helpful for keeping -next working.
This is on purpose. We use -next for, well, the next release,
and not as a band-aid for some other purpose. If you think things
don't get merged quickly enough, please take it with the person
processing the PRs (Paolo).
And we have another two weeks to release, so ample amount of
time until Paolo picks up the PR.
Sure, but we do also have the holidays and also the fact that it's a
build failure in a configuration used by some of the CIs means that
we've got a bunch of testing that simply hasn't been happening for a
couple of weeks now.
Given that most of the KVM tests are usually more broken than
the kernel itself, I'm not losing much sleep over it.
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
