From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82E17E77198 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:58:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D4F43C67B8 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:58:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (in-4.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CFC53C672D for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:57:53 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-4.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2; helo=smtp-out2.suse.de; envelope-from=chrubis@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93B061021EA4 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:57:52 +0100 (CET) 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-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 479DC1F44E; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:57:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none 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 34F3A139AB; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:57:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id T97OCn/9e2fLUQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Mon, 06 Jan 2025 15:57:51 +0000 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:57:37 +0100 From: Cyril Hrubis To: Petr Vorel Message-ID: References: <20250106154521.GC323533@pevik> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250106154521.GC323533@pevik> X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:25478, ipnet:::/0, country:RU] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 479DC1F44E X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-4.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] LTP Release preparations X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi! > > We are supposed to produce another LTP release at the end of January. > > As usuall I will try to look at the patchwork and get as much as > > possible reviewed in the next two weeks. If there is something that you > > think should get reviewed ASAP please let me know. > > When is actually the git freeze? Well we usually need at least a week of pre release testing so somewhere in the third week of January. I suppose that we can decide based on how the patch queue would look like at that point. > Do you plan to do tst_brk() change you had in RFC? Or you want to postpone after > the release? I have related fixes, but whole tst_brk could be relaxed if we > change the API. It's a rather intrusive change, so I would like to get it more exposure and testing. Generally it's not a good idea to do changes like that right before the release. > IMHO these could be merged: > > * Li's patchset on fuzzy sync: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/list/?series=437898 > > * device-drivers: Fix module build on kernel >= 5.18 > https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/1216 > > * ci: run shell loader tests > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/list/?series=436135 > I already got review from Li, I'd like to merge it soon. > > * doc: Update timeout related doc > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/patch/20241113151258.182353-1-pvorel@suse.cz/ > > I also hoped to send v3 for IMA loading policy patchset. If I manage to add it > and acked by Mimi Zohar it would be nice to have it in the release. I will try to have a look. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp