From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753898AbaEDVdc (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2014 17:33:32 -0400 Received: from mail.active-venture.com ([67.228.131.205]:52350 "EHLO mail.active-venture.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753821AbaEDVda (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2014 17:33:30 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 108.223.40.66 Message-ID: <5366B224.4070809@roeck-us.net> Date: Sun, 04 May 2014 14:33:24 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Kroah-Hartman CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, satoru.takeuchi@gmail.com, shuah.kh@samsung.com, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.14 000/158] 3.14.3-stable review References: <20140504154029.975081050@linuxfoundation.org> <5366769D.2010104@roeck-us.net> <20140504202738.GA25318@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20140504202738.GA25318@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/04/2014 01:27 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 10:19:25AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On 05/04/2014 08:38 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.14.3 release. >>> There are 158 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response >>> to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please >>> let me know. >>> >>> Responses should be made by Tue May 6 15:38:47 UTC 2014. >>> Anything received after that time might be too late. >>> >> >> Build results: >> total: 127 pass: 121 skipped: 4 fail: 2 >> >> Qemu tests all passed. >> >> Additional failure is from new build target unicore32:defconfig, which fails >> in all releases. The second failure is powerpc:allmodconfig which, together >> with powerpc:allyesconfig, fails to build in 3.14 and later kernels. >> Results are therefore as expected. >> >> Details are available at http://server.roeck-us.net:8010/builders. >> > > If unicore32 doesn't build on any kernel version, should we just drop > the whole arch? > Idea was to put the maintainer on notice. If nothing changes, that may be a good idea. > I'd suggest the same for powerpc, but odds are, there are still users :) > Yes, the company paying my salary, for example :-). But then if failure to build allmodconfig/allyesconfig is a criteria, arm would be a prime target as well ... Might be a discussion point for the kernel summit, though: What are criteria for an architecture to be accepted, and for it to remain in the kernel ? Availability of a pre-built tool set (score drops out)? defconfig build failure (unicore32 be gone) ? Something else ? Guenter