13:03:46 <jki> #startmeeting CIP IRC weekly meeting
13:03:46 <collab-meetbot`> Meeting started Thu Feb 23 13:03:46 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is jki. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:03:46 <collab-meetbot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
13:03:46 <collab-meetbot`> The meeting name has been set to 'cip_irc_weekly_meeting'
13:03:55 <jki> #topic AI review
13:04:04 <jki> 1. enable more stable trees for testing (patersonc)
13:04:14 <jki> there were some updates via the ML
13:04:27 <jki> looks like "WIP", started now
13:05:00 <jki> 2. report 6.1 test plan to LKML (pavel)
13:05:10 <jki> [skip, due to 1.]
13:05:15 <jki> anything else?
13:05:46 <iwamatsu> hi all
13:06:48 <jki> if not, moving on in...
13:06:50 <pave1> hi
13:06:50 <jki> 3
13:06:53 <jki> 2
13:06:56 <jki> 1
13:07:03 <jki> #topic Kernel maintenance updates
13:07:21 <pave1> I did some reviews, mostly 5.10.168.
13:07:24 <masami> This week reported 4 new CVEs and 0 updated CVEs.
13:07:30 <uli> i did reviews/backports from 4.14 to 4.4
13:08:37 <iwamatsu> I reviewed 5.10.168.
13:11:11 <jki> uli: backport efforts still reasonable?
13:11:31 <uli> yeah. most stuff that doesn't apply cleanly is for non-existing code
13:11:40 <jki> good
13:12:09 <jki> anything else here?
13:13:02 <jki> 3
13:13:04 <jki> 2
13:13:06 <jki> 1
13:13:09 <jki> #topic Kernel testing
13:13:29 <jki> oopps, missed one section
13:13:36 <jki> but now testing first
13:13:47 <alicefm> No updates. Still working at the previous pull request.
13:14:42 <alicefm> Working on fixing kselftest tests with cip kernel config
13:16:28 <jki> question: we are planning to suggest an alternative x86 target (to replace the existing SIMATIC IPC). how many boards would be needed for testing? 3 again?
13:21:25 <alicefm> Depend from what the usage will be, probably.
13:22:49 <jki> one will be reference target for IEC 61443 certification - that will come on top
13:22:52 <alicefm> Sorry but I don’t have a clear answer for this, probably patersonc knows more as lava cip administrator
13:23:01 <jki> ok, no problem
13:23:22 <jki> anything else regarding testing (before going back to kernel releases)?
13:23:40 <alicefm> Not from me
13:24:42 <jki> 3
13:24:44 <jki> 2
13:24:46 <jki> 1
13:24:49 <jki> #topic Kernel release status
13:24:55 <jki> -4.4
13:25:11 <uli> on track. i'll send a request for review for a handful of manual backports tomorrow or on monday.
13:25:38 <jki> good
13:25:49 <jki> RT is later
13:25:51 <jki> -4.19
13:26:12 <iwamatsu> LTS version is v4.19.273, and latest RT is v4.19.271-rt120.
13:26:42 <iwamatsu> RT does not follow LTS yet.
13:27:29 <jki> will that affect our schedule already?
13:29:44 <iwamatsu> There is no effect on the schedule yet.
13:30:25 <jki> good
13:30:28 <jki> -5.10
13:30:29 <pave1> 5.10 -- we need to either do 5.10.168-cip to match with -rt, or wait for next -rt.
13:30:58 <jki> is RT due now?
13:31:15 <jki> or will it be only, thus we have more time to wait?
13:32:03 <pave1> I'll need to check. But -rt releases are quite infrequent.
13:33:27 <iwamatsu> Will this week's CIP release be 5.10.168?
13:33:31 <jki> then an "exceptional" matching non-rt might be needed if it's not much effort
13:34:04 <iwamatsu> Latest RT is v5.10.168-rt83.
13:35:02 <pave1> iwamatsu -- if we are doing 5.10-cip this week,
13:35:18 <pave1> i'd suggest doing it on .168.
13:36:31 <iwamatsu> OK, release it in 168 to match RT.
13:36:51 <pave1> thank you!
13:36:55 <jki> perfect
13:37:01 <jki> then move on
13:37:10 <jki> #topic AOB
13:37:29 <jki> I put "topics for eTSC" on the table
13:38:37 <jki> chris mentioned: "Sources files in cip-kernel-config"
13:39:03 <jki> didn't check yet what it is about
13:41:44 <iwamatsu> cip-kernel-config also manages the source code to build. I think it's about that.
13:42:07 <jki> those all.sources files?
13:42:50 <jki> I guess I give Chris the stage to explain the topic during the TSC meeting ;)
13:43:07 <iwamatsu> or cip_qemu.sources and others
13:43:59 <iwamatsu> Or I can ask Chris about this before eTSC.
13:44:38 <jki> yeah, we should sort ourselves before to clarify what we want to achive - or clarify
13:45:08 <jki> a classic topic for eTSC would be "next CIP kernel"
13:45:41 <jki> should we ask to officially start the development of 6.1-cip and announce that?
13:46:18 <pave1> jki> on that topic... I don't believe there's
13:46:43 <pave1> a commitment to maintain 6.1-lts-rt at the moment.
13:47:29 <jki> ok, but that could be communicated as well
13:48:23 <jki> is anyone in touch with folks from RT on that?
13:48:46 <pave1> Yeah. At the moment we should start preparing  explaining the issues  etc.
13:49:56 <jki> there is also the RT Project quarterly meeting next Monday
13:50:00 <pave1> I'd say "we are maintaining 6.1-cip" is topic for next eTSC
13:50:10 <jki> pavel: will you also participate? maybe a topic there as well
13:50:43 <pave1> Yes, I have it on my schedule.
13:50:59 <pave1> And yes, that's likely good topic there.
13:51:03 <jki> then let's keep that in mind
13:51:30 <pave1> Is cip willing to offer resources if noone else steps up
13:51:38 <pave1> ?
13:53:45 <jki> valid question - how much effort would you estimate?
13:54:51 <pave1> No idea I'm afraid. I guess we could ask on the rt meeting...
13:55:21 <jki> Daniel had about a day per week back then, but that also included CIP-RT
13:55:53 <jki> and he did both 4.4 and 4.19, right?
13:56:07 <pave1> That was before my time.
13:56:34 <pave1> -cip-rt is low effort when corresponding -rt is maintained.
13:57:12 <jki> that is what I recall him saying as well
13:57:29 <jki> and was the reason we commited on lts-rt in the same run
13:58:49 <jki> ok...
13:58:54 <pave1> That makes sense. You'll be at the same meeting for Siemens, right?
13:59:02 <jki> yep
13:59:13 <pave1> And this would be TSC decision I guess.
13:59:27 <pave1> But I believe our position is
13:59:39 <jki> when it is also about budget, the board is needed afterwards
14:00:05 <pave1> 'it is not out of question'.
14:02:32 <jki> anything else for eTSC? or for AOB?
14:03:05 <pave1> aob -- that cpu bug mentioned last week was amd
14:03:22 <jki> yeah, read it
14:03:26 <pave1> -- and only affecting virtualisation, so we don't care much.
14:03:30 <jki> and KVM
14:03:32 <jki> exactly
14:03:41 <jki> well, we do care about KVM
14:04:02 <jki> but not on all version, and we are not alone
14:04:33 <jki> will a fix end up in 4.19? or did it already?
14:05:11 <pave1> I don't believe I seen it. It usually takes longer.
14:05:56 <jki> we should keep an eye on it, but I'm personally not aware of AMD KVM users with CIP kernel
14:06:23 <jki> maybe check if we have KVM enabled for AMD on that kernel versions
14:06:46 <jki> back than (at least 4.19), AMD was not yet that popular again
14:06:53 <jki> ok
14:06:57 <jki> anything else?
14:08:21 <jki> 3
14:08:23 <jki> 2
14:08:24 <jki> 1
14:08:27 <jki> #endmeeting