From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECF6A2C1A9; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 13:11:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="PirfMTLk"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="/vZmO3d4"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="Uk26/hGB"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="Dq2NWLSj" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF64421D34; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 13:11:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1704460298; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XMu0Tc8M/OGHMVCqGwKKidHMYVyujs8ULbIrYAKyctk=; b=PirfMTLkdWyOzUVVz7p6G2ULi4VhsbiBiEovaWdYP6RmzcuwhtQKKUgKa98M3/Ip8l1k/g XwNng9X+TvSLeuIRIA9U9KlvSfKkHLqoBB1MvKK/dh3zwPOw6svOjDiCk3dtV0Bq+qEnr5 Qv06406TfLtT/5tFFYvfvqWg9SA8IqM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1704460298; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XMu0Tc8M/OGHMVCqGwKKidHMYVyujs8ULbIrYAKyctk=; b=/vZmO3d4O+ZOvy2AL7ekQ7g4Fa0ZowPCpSXsCf1l01Jz1p9pxtSiDqKiaPh+6bDpvquCQ9 f3qkaTRGWtQT5+AQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1704460297; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XMu0Tc8M/OGHMVCqGwKKidHMYVyujs8ULbIrYAKyctk=; b=Uk26/hGBJXjpw8WTegFn/8dWqIzARLH7T6rfeEUvsOk1mAl5RjTrjREnCSUF82cXmbTFX9 ts3XwW8FLL2JAyFOtJWm3lU0iLZC81SdDShl3VZRNMWb0BNeZNSJ3HWfhQaPBCcvuyZzgl B8qt1ml182j0+u5k2jGWDzmk7ft6S0o= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1704460297; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XMu0Tc8M/OGHMVCqGwKKidHMYVyujs8ULbIrYAKyctk=; b=Dq2NWLSjfkY6KPsXaTn2B4MnPvlbKABhwyuoEx9zmsCM6PoEOnXj0wNXu+xI3t+rB1SZi2 oehXWwFEzy/kGqDg== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DE05136F5; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 13:11:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([10.150.64.162]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id GC9eAgkAmGVEDQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 05 Jan 2024 13:11:37 +0000 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 14:11:35 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Rob Landley Cc: Cyril Hrubis , Geert Uytterhoeven , ltp@lists.linux.it, Li Wang , Andrea Cervesato , Greg Ungerer , Jonathan Corbet , Randy Dunlap , John Paul Adrian Glaubitz , Christophe Lyon , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM , linux-riscv , Linux-sh list , automated-testing@lists.yoctoproject.org, buildroot@buildroot.org Subject: Call for nommu LTP maintainer [was: Re: [PATCH 00/36] Remove UCLINUX from LTP] Message-ID: <20240105131135.GA1484621@pevik> Reply-To: Petr Vorel References: <20240103015240.1065284-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20240103114957.GD1073466@pevik> <5a1f1ff3-8a61-67cf-59a9-ce498738d912@landley.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5a1f1ff3-8a61-67cf-59a9-ce498738d912@landley.net> X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Level: X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b="Uk26/hGB"; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=Dq2NWLSj X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.82 / 50.00]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; SPAMHAUS_XBL(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.cz:+]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; BAYES_HAM(-0.11)[66.47%]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; URIBL_BLOCKED(0.00)[suse.cz:dkim]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; RCPT_COUNT_TWELVE(0.00)[18]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-Spam-Score: -0.82 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: BF64421D34 X-Spam-Flag: NO Hi all, [ Cc also automated-testing and buildroot ML FYI thread started here: https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/20240103015240.1065284-1-pvorel@suse.cz/ ] > On 1/3/24 06:09, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > > Hi! > >> I am not sure I agree with this series. > >> Removing support for UCLINUX from LTP is almost a guarantee for > >> not noticing when more breakage is introduced. > >> How exactly is UCLINUX broken in LTP? > > As far as we know noone is using it and nobody is maintaing it for a > > decade, > Nobody is maintaining "uclinux" because that was a distro, but you can build > nommu support in buildroot and such, and people do. Right, there are nommu users. Will anybody join LTP development to maintain nommu support in LTP? The needed work is to add this support to LTP new C API [1] and use it in the relevant test. There is some implementation in the old API, I have no idea how well it worked. If nobody stands for maintaing nommu, we will have to delete it. There is nobody from the current maintainers who is using LTP on nommu HW (that is the reason why nommu support have not been implemented in the new API). Kind regards, Petr > Rob [1] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/wiki/C-Test-API