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

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 04 May 2014 14:33:24 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, satoru.takeuchi@...il.com,
	shuah.kh@...sung.com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.14 000/158] 3.14.3-stable review

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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/