[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEUSe78K_CJpr_=UhPC1h-A+q7Qizj9zY=zsf6_PBWzaKYLwxw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 11:01:25 -0600
From: Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@...aro.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>,
Harshit Mogalapalli <harshit.m.mogalapalli@...cle.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
patches@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de, conor@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15 000/102] 5.15.136-rc1 review
Hello!
On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 at 10:29, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
[...]
> And yes, I do run newer compilers and libraries, but the rest of the
> kernel builds fine with them (I make sure of that), but given that no
> one seems to care about perf breaking for so long, I just apply patches
> when they come up and don't have conflicts and see if anyone notices any
> difference.
>
> Normally, no one does :)
Just for the record, we stopped building Perf on these older branches
as we agreed with Guenter, for the same reason that you said before:
it fails all the time with a variety of toolchains/architectures. For
now, we're only building/testing Perf on latest stable (6.5) and
latest stable LTS (6.1). We brought that up at the OATS call a couple
of months back.
Greetings!
Daniel Díaz
daniel.diaz@...aro.org
Powered by blists - more mailing lists