Re: Stable list vs versioning

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:45:28AM -0700, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> >> Indeed they do, but the idea here was to have that information
> >> extractable from a binary, but that would have required cooperation both
> >> from the stable maintainers and the distro maintainers (who typically
> >> are on this list). That's why I posted.
> > You can't extract each individual patch information from a binary, how
> > would you encode 10k patches in every release?
> 
> Well, that wasn't the idea. The idea was to have the id's of the
> *stable* backports
> encoded automatically *only* for those modules that requested it.
> However, I realize that such a thing could easily grow..

So, you want to see the 8-10 patches we add every single day to the tree
somehow?  For the 4.4.y kernel right now that would be 2753 patches.  Do
you want to waste that much memory for something that the source tree
provides for you today already, automatically in a provable way?

I really don't think you want this.

What vendor kernels are you having problems with, and why isn't your QA
scripts already set up to automatically pull from them with every push
they do?  I know a number of good vendors also provide build systems,
for free, that do this work for you, whenever the base repo changes.
Why aren't you using them today already for your kernel modules?

And again, the question you don't seem to ever answer, what kernel
modules are you needing this work for?  Why aren't they upstream?  What
is preventing that from happening?  Is it a failure somehow on our
development process?

thanks,

greg k-h