public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>,
	"backports@vger.kernel.org" <backports@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: Bumping required kernels to 3.0 for Linux backports ?
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 11:18:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53451077.2030102@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAB=NE6VvyBKzEg=ErZzQMktY8eLytQ21JCPrOQbxvZ9m-nqHkw@mail.gmail.com>

On 2014-04-09 03:03, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> we have a age old dance of random parties, in particular the embedded
> folks, ending up with random ancient kernels on embedded devices. I've
> tried to carefully document a few ideas on why and how I believe we
> can make automatic kernel backporting scale [0] and part of this will
> be to try to bring consensus about a unified front to persuade users,
> partners, customers, whatever, to be at least on a kernel listed as
> supported on kernel.org. Today we backport down to the last 30
> kernels, from 2.6.24 up to 3.14 and while this is manageable right now
> I expect the number of supported drivers and features to keep
> increasing (I've stopped counting). I am very aware of the reasons to
> support a slew of old kernels, but its nothing but our own fault for
> not educating enough about the importance on upgrading. I realize this
> is an age old issue, but since I think we need scale backports and
> wish to remove older kernels from it fast, I wanted to see if any
> folks might have ideas on what can help here other than saying, 'if
> you use Linux backports, your drivers will be automatically backported
> and supported'.
> 
> To start off -- what's the *last* kernel you realistically need for
> your users to use backports right now? Is it really 2.6.25? Would
> anyone kick and scream if for the backports-3.15 release try take
> things up to support only down to least 3.0 *right now* ?
> 
> [0] http://www.do-not-panic.com/2014/04/automatic-linux-kernel-backporting-with-coccinelle.html
The oldest kernel in OpenWrt that we're still supporting with updates of
the backports tree is 3.3, so raising the minimum requirement to 3.0 is
completely fine with me.

I'm looking forward to getting rid of patches for older kernels that
often get in the way when using various wireless-testing versions ;)

- Felix

  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-09  9:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-09  1:03 Bumping required kernels to 3.0 for Linux backports ? Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-04-09  9:18 ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2014-04-09 18:28   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-04-09 19:12     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-04-09 20:01       ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-04-09 20:22         ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-04-09 20:52           ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-04-09 21:06             ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-04-10  7:31               ` Johannes Berg
2014-04-10  7:44               ` Takashi Iwai
2014-04-10 16:59                 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-04-10 17:04                   ` Arend van Spriel
2014-04-10 17:11                     ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-04-10 18:56                     ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-04-11  7:51                       ` Arend van Spriel
2014-04-11 18:18                         ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-04-10 17:16   ` Johannes Berg
2014-04-10 17:26     ` Felix Fietkau
2014-04-10 17:35       ` Johannes Berg
2014-04-09 10:59 ` Arend van Spriel
2014-04-09 18:25   ` Luis R. Rodriguez

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=53451077.2030102@openwrt.org \
    --to=nbd@openwrt.org \
    --cc=backports@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=m.chehab@samsung.com \
    --cc=mcgrof@do-not-panic.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox