From: gregkh at linuxfoundation.org (Greg Kroah-Hartman)
Subject: [Linux-kselftest-mirror] Towards 4.14 LTS
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 12:20:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171119112051.GA10015@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5E1947BC-9D22-42EB-BA29-96EA15A9C817@linaro.org>
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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (Greg Kroah-Hartman)
Subject: [Linux-kselftest-mirror] Towards 4.14 LTS
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 12:20:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171119112051.GA10015@kroah.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20171119112051.zxSVDNayU8A-W31wkMFpzrgYBoLcZVfEXYrTZ0xoddg@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5E1947BC-9D22-42EB-BA29-96EA15A9C817@linaro.org>
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017@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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] Towards 4.14 LTS
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 12:20:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171119112051.GA10015@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5E1947BC-9D22-42EB-BA29-96EA15A9C817@linaro.org>
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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Tom Gall <tom.gall@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux- stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, shuahkh@osg.samsung.com,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
ltp@lists.linux.it, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Towards 4.14 LTS
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 12:20:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171119112051.GA10015@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5E1947BC-9D22-42EB-BA29-96EA15A9C817@linaro.org>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-19 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-17 4:50 [Linux-kselftest-mirror] Towards 4.14 LTS tom.gall
2017-11-17 4:50 ` Tom Gall
2017-11-17 4:50 ` [LTP] " Tom Gall
2017-11-17 4:50 ` [Linux-kselftest-mirror] " Tom Gall
2017-11-19 11:20 ` gregkh [this message]
2017-11-19 11:20 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-11-19 11:20 ` [LTP] " Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-11-19 11:20 ` [Linux-kselftest-mirror] " Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-11-19 16:09 ` linux
2017-11-19 16:09 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-11-19 16:09 ` [LTP] " Guenter Roeck
2017-11-19 16:09 ` [Linux-kselftest-mirror] " Guenter Roeck
2017-11-20 16:23 ` tom.gall
2017-11-20 16:23 ` Tom Gall
2017-11-20 16:23 ` [LTP] " Tom Gall
2017-11-20 16:23 ` [Linux-kselftest-mirror] " Tom Gall
2017-11-21 12:41 ` [Linux-kselftest-mirror] [LTP] " chrubis
2017-11-21 12:41 ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-11-21 12:41 ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-11-21 12:41 ` [Linux-kselftest-mirror] " Cyril Hrubis
2017-11-20 16:10 ` chrubis
2017-11-20 16:10 ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-11-20 16:10 ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-11-20 16:10 ` [Linux-kselftest-mirror] " Cyril Hrubis
2017-11-20 16:48 ` tom.gall
2017-11-20 16:48 ` Tom Gall
2017-11-20 16:48 ` Tom Gall
2017-11-20 16:48 ` [Linux-kselftest-mirror] " Tom Gall
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171119112051.GA10015@kroah.com \
--to=unknown@example.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.