13:03:06 <jki> #startmeeting CIP IRC weekly meeting
13:03:06 <collab-meetbot`> Meeting started Thu Mar  9 13:03:06 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is jki. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:03:06 <collab-meetbot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
13:03:06 <collab-meetbot`> The meeting name has been set to 'cip_irc_weekly_meeting'
13:03:13 <jki> #topic AI review
13:03:22 <jki> 1. enable more stable trees for testing (patersonc)
13:03:41 <patersonc[m]> We're now testing all of the LTS releases
13:03:42 <jki> iirc, there were bbb issues left, right?
13:03:51 <patersonc[m]> Yea
13:03:59 <patersonc[m]> I've disabled testing with our BBB config for now
13:04:03 <jki> ok
13:04:11 <patersonc[m]> It likely needs to be updated, but I'm not sure where the original came from
13:04:31 <patersonc[m]> And I can't see an equivalent upstream/google
13:04:45 <patersonc[m]> iwamatsu: You did the original commit - any ideas?
13:06:12 <iwamatsu> Sorry, I dont understand about it.
13:06:53 <patersonc[m]> https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-kernel/cip-kernel-config/-/commit/e28e124c4b0bdbf9d9552a3ee77ba29b4247f86f
13:07:30 <jki> how to reproduce the bbb issue? use that condig with 6.1-LTS and try to boot?
13:07:58 <jki> if so, then isar-cip-core should be able to generate such a broken image as well
13:08:22 <jki> I have board at home and could give it try tomorrow if that helps
13:09:00 <patersonc[m]> This is the bbb config trying to boot with v6.1 on BBB: https://lava.ciplatform.org/scheduler/job/869559
13:09:09 <patersonc[m]> It also didn't work with v5.15
13:09:18 <patersonc[m]> I'll add more details to the MR when I make it
13:09:22 <patersonc[m]> So people can review there
13:09:28 <iwamatsu> I see, i dont remenber...
13:09:40 <iwamatsu> But I will check it.
13:09:43 <patersonc[m]> iwamatsu: No worries, it was a long time agi!
13:10:07 <patersonc[m]> s/agi/ago/
13:10:30 <patersonc[m]> Anyway, once the MRs are done for the LTS testing, shall I expand it to all of the active stable trees? (not just LTS)
13:11:41 <pave1> i believe that makes sense.
13:12:21 <patersonc[m]> Okay
13:12:53 <jki> so, consider this AI done already, or keep it open until that is done as well?
13:13:57 <patersonc[m]> I think we can close it. The immediate goal was to get 6.1 testing started
13:14:05 <jki> perfect
13:14:18 <jki> 2. report 6.1 test plan to LKML (pavel)
13:14:36 <pave1> I did.
13:14:44 <jki> oh, great!
13:15:03 <jki> any reactions?
13:15:22 <pave1> I was under impression that we'll test everything, and may have confused that.
13:15:31 <pave1> Nothing so far.
13:15:48 <jki> anyway - thanks!
13:15:54 <jki> 3. clarify usage of .sources files in cip-kernel-config (patersonc)
13:16:30 <patersonc[m]> pave1: I think so - and we'll get there :)
13:16:41 <patersonc[m]> jki: I haven't emailed the ML yet, so action still pending
13:16:50 <jki> ok
13:16:53 <jki> 4. reach out to Greg regarding LTS (jan)
13:16:59 <jki> still open on my side
13:17:14 <jki> will try to ping Ben first, later today or tomorrow
13:17:22 <jki> any other AIs?
13:17:47 <jki> 3
13:17:50 <jki> 2
13:17:52 <jki> 1
13:17:55 <jki> #topic Kernel maintenance updates
13:18:04 <uli> now reviewing 5.10.173
13:18:15 <masami> This week reported 11 new CVEs and 4 updated CVEs.
13:18:19 <pave1> I did reviews on autosel and 5.10.173.
13:18:21 <alicefm> Gregkh is here
13:19:00 <iwamatsu> I am reviewing 5.10.173.
13:19:05 <pave1> S
13:19:26 <alicef_> gregkh: <- jki
13:21:39 <pave1> I will need to finish review of 4.4 patches. Sorry for the delay.
13:21:41 <gregkh> alicef_: ?  I've been here for a very long time...
13:23:23 <alicef_> gregkh: :)
13:23:55 <uli> pave1: i would appreciate that, it's been a while
13:24:00 <jki> gregkh: don't feel disturbed - we would eventually like to understand the needs to make longer LTS sustainable (again) and would reach out for that, likely via LKML
13:24:43 <gregkh> jki: there are no "needs" to do so, sorry.  As I wrote in the LF Board meeting slide deck last week, "The 6 year LTS experiment has failed"
13:25:29 <gregkh> especially given all of the new laws coming into play in the US and EU, long-term kernels just are not going to work at all.
13:25:33 <gregkh> sorry.
13:25:52 <gregkh> I predict 3 year max over time, but for now we'll try 4 years to get over the transition period.
13:26:20 <gregkh> ideally we can get back to 2 years, but that needs help from some SoC vendors, which are doing the work now, so we might get there.
13:26:24 <gregkh> anyway, good luck!
13:26:33 <jki> that interpretation of regulations is new to me at least
13:27:05 <jki> also talking to colleagues exposed to strict regulations already today
13:27:21 <pave1> We'll promised to maintain the kernel for 10 years. If law prevents that, we'd like to know...
13:27:40 <jki> yep
13:27:48 <gregkh> define "promised", if it's a contract, that's on you, sorry.
13:28:02 <gregkh> if not, well, you can always change it :)
13:28:04 <pave1> Looks like it is on LF...
13:28:32 <gregkh> on the LF?  Hah, no, your working group only, the LF doesn't promise anything with regards to kernel stuff, you all know that :)
13:28:45 <patersonc[m]> Indeed
13:29:30 <pave1> Well, fortunately it is not on -me-...
13:30:10 <gregkh> then figure out who it is on and work with them please.  good luck!
13:30:16 <jki> the only one under contract in his context are suppliers (like my employer) with their customers
13:30:40 <gregkh> and as for regulations, there's nothing that says "you can not change this kernel version and it must stay the same" in any regulation that I know of.
13:31:25 <patersonc[m]> CIP always planned to do 10 years support before LTS was extended to 6 years. So there's nothing new for CIP here - just that we don't get 4 extra years of free maintenance from Greg anymore :)
13:31:28 <gregkh> jki: great, then that's between your employer and their customers, that's not anything with the LF.
13:31:39 <gregkh> patersonc[m]: exactly.
13:31:52 <pave1> But better explanation would still be welcome, and probably get that explanation to people in charge of CIP project.
13:32:17 <gregkh> pave1: point them at the LF board meeting slides from last week, it has the details if they are curious.
13:32:27 <gregkh> pave1: and it says what to do if they have questions.
13:32:44 <jki> gregkh: yes, we only try to support them as community as this is what we recieve funding for
13:32:57 <gregkh> I'll probably flesh it all out in a blog post eventually to make it more widely visible.
13:33:12 <jki> the more I'd like to understand statements like "not going to work at all"
13:33:28 <jki> that would be great!
13:33:28 <pave1> If someone had url for slides or blog post explanation, that would be welcome.
13:33:47 <gregkh> jki: see the new US and EU rules for the reasoning about "not going to work".  they have the details and requirements.
13:34:16 <patersonc[m]> pave1: We should be able to get a copy of the slides from Neal
13:34:50 <alicef> patersonc[m]: can you share the slides also with me?
13:34:57 <pave1> petersonc. ok, that makes sense.
13:35:10 <alicef> once you get it from Neal
13:35:22 <patersonc[m]> alicef: Sure when we get them
13:35:29 <alicef> thanks
13:35:56 <pave1> So I understand it is LF lawyers saying 10 years can't be done?
13:36:39 <jki> gregkh: I've read first statements from community perspectives, but those were about way more fundamental issues
13:36:55 <gregkh> pave1: nope, not the LF lawyers.  me :)
13:37:23 <gregkh> pave1: the lawyers have not weighed in on it yet, as no one has asked them to.
13:39:32 <gregkh> sorry, irc does not lend itself to in depth discussions like this.
13:39:44 <gregkh> anyway, good luck all!
13:39:50 <pave1> Ok. I gues this for CIP TSC level or above, not for me. Hopefully slides will clear my curiosity.
13:39:55 <pave1> Thanks!
13:39:57 <patersonc[m]> :)
13:40:01 <patersonc[m]> Thanks gregkh
13:40:20 <jki> thanks!
13:40:39 <jki> ok, let's continue with "business as usual" for now ;)
13:40:54 <jki> anything else regarding maintenance topics?
13:41:27 <jki> 3
13:41:29 <jki> 2
13:41:31 <jki> 1
13:41:33 <jki> #topic Kernel release status
13:41:38 <jki> - 4.4
13:41:42 <uli> still waiting for reviews
13:41:52 <jki> pavel: ?
13:42:10 <jki> or anyone?
13:42:22 <pave1> Should have them no later than tommorow. sorry for delay.
13:42:38 <uli> ok then.
13:43:03 <jki> good
13:43:16 <jki> - 4.19
13:43:45 <iwamatsu> LTS 4.19 is 4.19.275, and 4.19 of RT kernel is v4.19.271-rt120. no RT tracking.
13:45:37 <jki> so, we are on schedule still?
13:47:06 <jki> a new RT should come these weeks from us
13:48:21 <jki> -5.10
13:48:30 <iwamatsu> right, but we can not release -cip-rt this week
13:49:13 <iwamatsu> LTS 5.10 is 5.10.172. 5.10 of RT kernel is v5.10.168-rt83. on schedule yet.
13:49:23 <jki> good
13:49:31 <jki> then let's move on
13:49:33 <jki> #topic Kernel testing
13:50:16 <patersonc[m]> Main thing from me was expanding the stable testing
13:51:22 <patersonc[m]> Perhaps the only thing...
13:52:00 <jki> ok - anyone anything else on testing?
13:52:11 <arisut> https://github.com/kernelci/kernelci-core/pull/1705
13:52:36 <jki> nice!
13:52:50 <arisut> the pr for using cip-kernel-configs on cip kernels with kernelCI as been merged
13:53:27 <arisut> now we have 5.10.y-cip 4.4.y-cip and 4.19.y-cip testing cip-kernel-config with some kselftest test also
13:54:40 <jki> good
13:54:48 <jki> move on?
13:54:59 <arisut> ok
13:55:05 <jki> 3
13:55:08 <jki> 2
13:55:09 <sietze> one thing thing from my side
13:55:20 <jki> go ahead!
13:55:37 <sietze> I requested a chat with Chris considering test reporting
13:55:56 <sietze> patersonc will you be able to make that?
13:56:08 <sietze> Is there anybody else interested in that topic here?
13:56:20 <patersonc[m]> sietze: Yes, sorry for not getting back
13:57:16 <jki> will you do that exchange directly, or in a recorded irc?
13:57:34 <jki> would possibly point some colleague afterward to it
13:58:40 <sietze> I arranged a teams meeting, (bosch hosted I guess). But can invite anybody who's interested
13:59:09 <sietze> Anyway, most important thing is that Chris will be there
13:59:30 <sietze> If not, than IMHO the meeting will not make much sense
13:59:55 <jki> then just summarize next time ;)
13:59:56 <jki> tia!
14:00:01 <jki> anything else?
14:00:10 <patersonc[m]> sietze: Perhaps forward the invite to the cip-members mainling list
14:00:53 <sietze> Ok, good. THanks for accepting. Will forward to cip-members then
14:01:01 <sietze> Need to step out now
14:01:03 <sietze> Thanks!
14:01:21 <jki> #topic AOB
14:01:24 <patersonc[m]> sietze: Thanks
14:01:36 <jki> anything on other business today?
14:02:45 <jki> 5
14:02:48 <jki> 4
14:02:54 <jki> 3
14:02:56 <jki> 2
14:02:57 <jki> 1
14:02:59 <jki> #endmeeting