[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171119112051.GA10015@kroah.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 12:20:51 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Tom Gall <tom.gall@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux- stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, shuahkh@....samsung.com,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, ltp@...ts.linux.it,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Towards 4.14 LTS
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 10:50:23PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote:
> At Linaro we’ve been putting effort into regularly running kernel tests over
> arm, arm64 and x86_64 targets. On those targets we’re running mainline, -next,
> 4.4, and 4.9 kernels and yes we are adding to this list as the hardware
> capacity grows.
>
> For test buckets we’re using just LTP, kselftest and libhugetlbfs and
> like kernels we will add to this list.
I'm sorry, I don't understand this sentance.
> With the 4.14 cycle being a little ‘different’ in so much as the goal to
> have it be an LTS kernel I think it’s important to take a look at some
> 4.14 test results.
>
> Grab a beverage, this is a bit of a long post. But quick summery 4.14 as
> released looks just as good as 4.13, for the test buckets I named above.
Thanks for doing this testing and letting us know.
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists