Re: [GIT PULL] KVM/arm64 fixes for 6.7, part #2

[Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>]

On 2023-12-22 13:26, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 01:16:41PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> 
>> > Oliver, should your tree be in -next?
> 
>> No, we don't have the KVM/arm64 fixes in -next.
> 
> I see it's not, I'm asking if it should be - given the latencies
> involved it seems like it'd be helpful for keeping -next working.

This is on purpose. We use -next for, well, the next release,
and not as a band-aid for some other purpose. If you think things
don't get merged quickly enough, please take it with the person
processing the PRs (Paolo).

> 
>> And we have another two weeks to release, so ample amount of
>> time until Paolo picks up the PR.
> 
> Sure, but we do also have the holidays and also the fact that it's a
> build failure in a configuration used by some of the CIs means that
> we've got a bunch of testing that simply hasn't been happening for a
> couple of weeks now.

Given that most of the KVM tests are usually more broken than
the kernel itself, I'm not losing much sleep over it.

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...