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 stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html