12:01:27 <jki> #startmeeting CIP IRC weekly meeting
12:01:27 <collab-meetbot`> Meeting started Thu Jun 11 12:01:27 2026 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is jki. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
12:01:27 <collab-meetbot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
12:01:27 <collab-meetbot`> The meeting name has been set to 'cip_irc_weekly_meeting'
12:01:34 <jki> #topic AI review
12:01:48 <jki> I had nothing noted
12:02:00 <jki> 5
12:02:02 <jki> 4
12:02:03 <jki> 3
12:02:05 <jki> 2
12:02:07 <jki> 1
12:02:09 <jki> #topic Kernel maintenance updates
12:02:47 <uli> i pushed 4.4
12:02:56 <iwamatsu> I reviewed 6.12.90
12:04:10 <jki> "This week reported 63 new CVEs and 7 updated CVEs." - masami
12:04:22 <jki> anything else to add?
12:04:50 <jki> 5
12:04:52 <jki> 4
12:04:54 <jki> 3
12:04:56 <jki> 2
12:04:57 <jki> 1
12:05:00 <jki> #topic Kernel release status
12:05:13 <jki> all on track, 6.1 (both) will be next
12:05:32 <jki> still no 6.1-rt-stable, I suppose...
12:06:08 <jki> anything else to add?
12:06:22 <jki> 5
12:06:24 <jki> 4
12:06:26 <jki> 3
12:06:27 <jki> 2
12:06:29 <jki> 1
12:06:31 <jki> #topic Kernel testing
12:07:16 <jki> https://lava.ciplatform.org/scheduler/worker/lab-cip-siemens-muc is green again
12:07:29 <patersonc> Thanks
12:07:37 <patersonc> Not testing related, but I'm working with gitlab to get our license renewed
12:08:37 <patersonc> No other updates
12:08:53 <jki> if there is nothing more on testing, then move on...
12:09:01 <jki> 5
12:09:03 <jki> 4
12:09:04 <jki> 3
12:09:06 <jki> 2
12:09:07 <jki> 1
12:09:09 <jki> #topic AOB
12:09:37 <jki> there were 1 or 2 repos without licenses related to the kernel...
12:10:06 <jki> cip-kernel/lts-commit-list was one
12:10:26 <jki> still unsure about just pushing GPL or first asking TSC
12:11:32 <jki> patersonc: who should delete cip-kernel/cip-kernel-tests?
12:11:54 <iwamatsu> I think the original license for this data is GPLv2. Therefore, the license for this repository will also be GPLv2.
12:12:28 <jki> if that is true, we cannot deviate anyway
12:12:50 <jki> iwamatsu: would you push a license file then so that gitlab is identifying it?
12:13:18 <iwamatsu> OK
12:13:35 <patersonc> cip-kernel/cip-kernel-tests should be okay now. I pushed a license to it. I'm happy to delete it though if it's not needed
12:13:37 <jki> GPLv2 or GPLv2+?
12:13:59 <jki> patersonc: it's confusing as the real repo is under cip-testing
12:14:02 <jki> same name
12:14:12 <patersonc> Shall I just delete cip-kernel/cip-kernel-tests?
12:14:22 <jki> I would say, yes
12:15:02 <patersonc> Done
12:15:08 <jki> thanks
12:15:42 <jki> iwamatsu: do you also know if we should use GPLv2+ for the other repo?
12:15:51 <patersonc> So just  lts-commit-list remaining now. Plus a couple of non-code task-only projects that break the GitLab tooling (working with gitlab on this)
12:16:07 <jki> some scripts are v2+ IIRC
12:16:26 <iwamatsu> I don't know now.
12:17:14 <patersonc> I can do it if you want?
12:17:50 <jki> do what?
12:18:16 <patersonc> Add the license to lts-commit-list
12:18:43 <patersonc> Gitlab has a template for GPL v2, not v2+. But easy to copy in 2+ if that's what you want
12:19:18 <jki> the point is first of all identifying the required license
12:19:27 <patersonc> ok
12:19:36 <jki> although v2+ allows us to pin to v2-only as well
12:20:13 <jki> we would simply push the right text as COPYING file commit, and gitlab should recognize that
12:23:17 <iwamatsu> I will proceed with that work.
12:23:40 <jki> thanks! you were the initial committer anyway, just found out ;)
12:23:45 <jki> good
12:24:09 <jki> then maybe give pavel a change to catch up - we are already in AOB
12:24:19 <pav3l> I am late, sorry.
12:24:26 <jki> anything you want to add from other topics?
12:24:29 <pav3l> I did reviews. 6.12.92 and .93.
12:24:53 <pav3l> And it looks like this cycle is really a bit different, as we are pretty late
12:25:04 <pav3l> and there are still big series flying around.
12:25:12 <pav3l> Other than that, not much to report.
12:25:26 <jki> did you ping regarding 6.1-rt?
12:25:35 <pav3l> Not yet, sorry.
12:25:53 <jki> will be due now for us very soon
12:25:56 <jki> ok
12:26:29 <jki> then maybe switch to the AI review topic
12:26:40 <jki> uli: thanks again for the write-up
12:26:47 <uli> np
12:26:54 <jki> anyone else has comments / ideas regarding it?
12:27:47 <jki> patersonc: I suppose our AWS account would be able to cover some instances with GPUs as well, right?
12:28:34 <patersonc> Probably
12:28:42 <patersonc> If we want to pay lots :P
12:28:46 <jki> cost-wise, we would obviously be prepared to handle any overrun as CIP
12:29:19 <jki> uli: do you have an idea about what would match your needs from the AWS offerings?
12:29:35 <uli> i haven't looked into aws yet
12:29:51 <jki> we will need some rough math on costs when running this, even when just for some weeks
12:29:56 <jki> ...first
12:30:33 <jki> advantage might be that his should be able to be started and stopped as needed
12:30:36 <patersonc> Maybe LF has a central service of some kind
12:30:57 <patersonc> Maybe we need to get Google or someone similar to join the project and get free tokens ;)
12:31:01 <jki> regular LF IT will likely be too costly
12:31:25 <jki> getting tokens means also buying into specific commercial models
12:32:04 <jki> we could try that as well, later on, and specifically if there something comming via Glasswing
12:32:25 <jki> but the first idea would be replicating uli's setup for shared use
12:32:46 <uli> what would be an acceptable budget anyway? like per month?
12:33:32 <jki> I would have not problem to ask for, say, 10K first, and we see how far we would get with it
12:34:05 <jki> days, weeks, or some month - and then we can check again the value and make a real plan
12:34:23 <uli> the only option i have looked at so far (except for pay-as-you-go stuff like vast.ai) is a server from hetzner for 800 something per month (96 GB VRAM)
12:34:23 <jki> likely days would be too short, though ;)
12:34:46 <uli> +2000 or 3000 (don't remember) setup or therabouts
12:35:16 <jki> additional supplier may complicate a quick setup, I guess
12:35:27 <uli> yeah, i expected that...
12:35:29 <jki> that's why I thought of AWS - we have our credit card registered
12:36:51 <jki> further thoughts?
12:37:12 <patersonc> Thank you for the good analysis uli
12:38:10 <uli> happy to help
12:38:16 <jki> https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/g5/ - this sounds... expensive :)
12:40:23 <uli> i have difficulties parsing that web site
12:40:53 <pav3l> You can click and talk to their "certainly not halucinating" AI assistent :)
12:42:21 <jki> there are also special inference instances, but probably with special accelerators
12:42:36 <jki> known to work is something with NVIDIA or AMD, I suppose
12:42:57 <jki> sooo may different instance types, easily losing overview
12:43:45 <uli> you want nvidia. everything else theoretically works but in practice is a pain
12:43:52 <uli> especially intel
12:44:08 <jki> https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/g7e/ ?
12:44:37 <jki> "NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server Edition"
12:44:40 <patersonc> https://instances.vantage.sh/aws/ec2/g5.12xlarge?currency=USD&duration=annually
12:45:42 <jki> 5k/h - hmm, that would be short fun with my 10K
12:47:05 <pav3l> jki: That's likely $5/h, right?
12:47:20 <pav3l> jki: It is US, so dot is decimal dot.
12:47:32 <jki> yeah, dot-confusions
12:47:36 <jki> sound much better
12:47:40 <uli> https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/gex131/  1k/month incl vat
12:48:06 <jki> uli: that can still be an option once we know we want to run that 24/7
12:48:16 <jki> ...or have to
12:48:35 <jki> I would go for some on-demand first, if possible, also to play with instance sizes
12:48:41 <uli> in that case vast.ai might be an option. it's not super-reliable, but then i always choose the cheapest, most unreliable option there... :)
12:48:43 <jki> or with new models
12:50:01 <jki> looks a bit cheaper, if I chose the right comparison, but not by factors, right?
12:50:35 <uli> it's actually even a bit more expensive than the hetzner option, but then you can get everything by the hour there
12:51:16 <uli> and no setup fees
12:51:49 <jki> my point is what would be easiest for us to start playing, also from account handling perspective
12:52:10 <jki> I don't want anyone to swipe their personal credit cards here
12:53:56 <jki> what speaks against trying out an EC2 instance first on our existing account? later, we could check what is needed to use other hosters as well
12:55:12 <uli> for me that's ok
12:57:09 <jki> then I would still ask for a 10K reserve from TSC->Board so that we have some buffer in case we overshoot the AWS grants
12:57:51 <jki> anything else for today?
12:58:22 <jki> 5
12:58:23 <jki> 4
12:58:25 <jki> 3
12:58:27 <jki> 2
12:58:29 <jki> 1
12:58:30 <jki> #endmeeting