12:02:14 <jki> #startmeeting CIP IRC weekly meeting
12:02:14 <collab-meetbot> Meeting started Thu Jun  1 12:02:14 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is jki. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
12:02:14 <collab-meetbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
12:02:14 <collab-meetbot> The meeting name has been set to 'cip_irc_weekly_meeting'
12:02:21 <jki> #topic AI review
12:02:24 <jki> 1. create kernelci pipeline for buster images (arisut)
12:03:15 <jki> any news on this?
12:03:54 <alicefm> I gived a look today about how to integrate bullseye buster and bookworm used on kas/opt to the kernelci.yml file
12:04:17 <alicefm> but still not sure how to proceed
12:05:27 <alicefm> jki do you have any suggestion?
12:06:21 <jki> are you unsure how to build what?
12:06:37 <jki> already tried 'kas-container menu'?
12:07:02 <alicefm> i see that kas added bullseye buster and bookworm container
12:07:34 <alicefm> I'm trying to do same for the kernelci container
12:09:01 <jki> we are currently building with bullseye containers, from buster to bookworm
12:09:06 <jki> that is not an issue
12:10:00 <alicefm> yes anyway will look into it and add it to the kernelci container
12:10:34 <jki> ok - looks like kernelci.yml is not really stressed in CI or configurable via Kconfig
12:10:52 <jki> hope it's not broken
12:11:06 <jki> anyway, follow up with questions on the list if you have any
12:11:12 <jki> other AIs?
12:11:32 <alicefm> ok with others ai
12:11:46 <alicefm> with going on
12:11:55 <jki> #topic Kernel maintenance updates
12:12:17 <pave1> I did reviews on 6.1.31
12:12:19 <masami> This week reported 5 new CVEs and 3 updated CVEs.
12:12:22 <uli> i'm preparing 4.4
12:12:39 <iwamatsu> I reviewed 6.1.30 and 6.1.31
12:12:54 <pave1> One thing from past -- Renesas wanted to merge counter driver and they needed to update counter subsystem to do that.
12:13:14 <pave1> (There were other options).
12:13:37 <pave1> I felt uneasy about that and they did not retry.
12:13:55 <pave1> If someone has opinions what to do there, we can discuss that.
12:14:02 <jki> updating subsystems imply testing all other affected drivers, at least all in our configs...
12:14:24 <jki> right?
12:15:05 <pave1> I am not sure we have counter subsystem enabled in our configs at all.
12:17:07 <jki> maybe the counter subsystem would be on the edge by being comparably simple?
12:17:13 <jki> didn't look at the patches, though, you likely did
12:17:31 <iwamatsu> it is not enable.
12:17:37 <pave1> I am not sure there were patches :-).
12:17:59 <pave1> They asked if we wanted non-mainline driver or if we wanted to update the subsystem.
12:18:07 <pave1> I explained them we want neither :-).
12:18:12 <jki> well, they need to propose at least some list of commits they would pick
12:19:05 <pave1> So the proposal is to update counter subsystem in 5.10-cip to 6.1 version (or so).
12:19:16 <pave1> Then merge the driver.
12:20:41 <jki> if that update is reasonable, complete (all affected drivers), and reviewable
12:21:49 <pave1> Dunno. Well -- if another vendor needs other version of kernel then we are in trouble :-).
12:22:18 <jki> then they also need to upgrade their driver to their mainline version ;)
12:22:28 <patersonc[m]> Does CIP normally accept such subsystem "upgrades"?
12:22:29 <jki> but, yes, it can become nasty
12:22:54 <jki> if someone requested a DRM subsystem update, the answer would likely be simpler
12:23:02 <jki> "no way" :)
12:23:08 <pave1> So... I don't believe it will cause problems in this concrete case.
12:24:37 <pave1> So... "We considered the proposal to update counter subsystem to XXX, and if we you are willing to do the work and submit reviewable patches, we will consider it" ?
12:25:13 <jki> let them start with presenting a list / number of commits they would have to backport
12:25:22 <jki> unless they have a backport to look at already
12:25:48 <pave1> Ok, I'll write something up.
12:27:21 <patersonc[m]> Thanks
12:27:44 <jki> perfect
12:27:52 <jki> anything else on kernel maintenance?
12:28:03 <jki> 4
12:28:05 <jki> 3
12:28:07 <jki> 2
12:28:08 <jki> 1
12:28:11 <jki> #topic Kernel release status
12:28:14 <jki> 4.4
12:28:39 <uli> sent the list of patches to review; most are trivial
12:29:16 <uli> no problems expected
12:29:31 <jki> good
12:29:34 <jki> 4.19
12:29:51 <pave1> will take a look, thatnks.
12:29:52 <iwamatsu> on track
12:30:13 <jki> any rt issues?
12:30:19 <pave1> Probably on Monday.
12:30:43 <pave1> -rt: I still have patches I'm porting.
12:31:17 <jki> ok
12:31:20 <jki> 5.10
12:32:05 <pave1> (I meant 4.4-rt I still have a series and should do update soon. 4.19/5.10 should be on track).
12:32:33 <jki> thanks for clarifying
12:32:49 <jki> i suppose 5.10 is generally on track
12:33:24 <jki> where are we with 6.1 by now?
12:33:34 <pave1> Busy with reviews in this part of cycle.
12:33:45 <pave1> Should continue when there is less to review :-).
12:33:54 <pave1> Next step is adding gitlab-ci.yml
12:33:59 <jki> ok
12:34:52 <jki> then let's move on
12:34:54 <jki> #topic Kernel testing
12:35:14 <alicefm> 6.1 is on kernelci
12:37:08 <jki> anything else on testing?
12:37:19 <alicefm> im now working on getting isar cip core debian versions tested with respective kernel
12:38:02 <alicefm> nothing else
12:38:16 <jki> ok, then moving on in...
12:38:16 <patersonc[m]> I don't think there's anything from me, just the usual maintenance etc.
12:38:25 <jki> 5
12:38:27 <jki> 4
12:38:31 <jki> 3
12:38:32 <jki> 2
12:38:34 <jki> 1
12:38:36 <jki> #topic AOB
12:38:50 <patersonc[m]> o/
12:38:59 <patersonc[m]> EOSS is later this month. Do you think we can/should aim to have our first 6.1 release by then?
12:39:20 <patersonc[m]> Then we'll have something to announce etc...
12:39:30 <patersonc[m]> Unless we needed the E-TSC to go through anything
12:39:47 <jki> would be nice - but makes my question above more concrete
12:40:01 <jki> what is technically all missing? and until when could we finish this?
12:40:08 <pave1> We can probably do that.
12:40:10 <jki> then I can ask for the OK from the TSC
12:40:40 <jki> next TSC is next week
12:40:46 <pave1> Add yml, forward port 5.10 patches, then agree we are happy with the 6.1 version..
12:41:47 <iwamatsu> pavel, I can help them
12:41:54 <jki> I can tell the TSC, "when we are done with X, Y, Z, we would release 6.1-cip - ok?"
12:42:08 <jki> just tell me "X, Y, Z" :)
12:43:00 <pave1> Hmm. Let's just do X, Y, Z and tell them when its ready.
12:43:04 <jki> next week might be the last chance before EOSS - I could image we will skip the one the week before
12:43:24 <pave1> Understood.
12:43:31 <jki> if unlucky, we will only get the ok in the in-person meeting
12:43:39 <jki> but that is Monday of the EOSS week
12:43:49 <jki> might still be early enough...
12:43:57 <jki> if we tag then quickly
12:44:48 <jki> I can ask next week for opinions and announce that we would ask for permission at EOSS
12:44:59 <jki> would that be fine?
12:45:13 <patersonc[m]> Sure
12:45:20 <iwamatsu> +1
12:45:25 <pave1> Lets see. We might have "6.1-cip was released" for EOSS, or we could have "6.1-cip will be real soon now" :-).
12:45:41 <patersonc[m]> pave1 let me know if there is anything you need me to help with
12:46:04 <pave1> patersonc, iwamatsu: yes, will do, thanks!
12:46:20 <jki> perfect, that's a plan
12:46:27 <jki> anything else?
12:47:30 <jki> 5
12:47:31 <jki> 4
12:47:32 <jki> 3
12:47:34 <jki> 2
12:47:35 <jki> 1
12:47:37 <jki> #endmeeting