Re: 2.26 freeze in a little over a week

[Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at dabbelt dot com>]

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 08:02:21 PDT (-0700), siddhesh@gotplt.org wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 June 2017 05:04 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>> I'm wary of adding new ports without a clear timescale when we can expect
>>> them to be buildable with build-many-glibcs.py using normal upstream
>>> sources of other components.
>>>
>>> Has the Linux kernel port been accepted subject to at most minor changes
>>> relative to the latest version, with good reason to expect it will be in
>>> Linux 4.13?  Is the port in linux-next, or will it be within the next
>>> month?  If the glibc port won't be buildable with Linux 4.13, that's
>>> leaving a long time with a new port people can't build when making bulk
>>> changes.
>>
>> I agree with Joseph.
>>
>> We need to see some fairly clear intent from the Linux kernel side before
>> adopting a new port, and we like the kernel side to land first before
>> glibc. This ensures the ABI work is done with time.
>
> Thanks, so Palmer this should make it clear for you as to what your next
> steps should be.  Please continue working on your patches.  It would be
> a good idea to continue working on your patches on a priority since even
> if it does not make 2.26, it could make 2.27 early so as to get plenty
> of testing before the bits get baked towards the end of the year.

Thanks!  We're pushing on Linux right now to try and see if we can get into
4.13.  Some of our simpler patches are starting to trickle in, but it's going
to be really tight getting the core architecture stuff all merged.

I'll try and keep you posted.  We also hope to submit another glibc patch set
soon, I think we're getting close to the end of triaging the test suite.