18:00:13 <jwb> #startmeeting
18:00:13 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Mar 30 18:00:13 2012 UTC.  The chair is jwb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:13 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
18:00:28 <jwb> #meetingname Fedora Kernel meeting
18:00:28 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_kernel_meeting'
18:00:43 <jwb> #meetingtopic Fedora Kernel meeting
18:00:54 <jwb> #addchair jforbes davej
18:01:08 <jwb> #topic init
18:01:16 <jwb> everyone ready?
18:01:20 <jforbes> yup
18:01:22 <davej> yep
18:01:36 <jwb> who's the token community person today?  nirik ? :)
18:01:47 * nirik waves
18:02:05 <jwb> ok, so should probably start with the release recaps
18:02:14 <jwb> #topic F15
18:02:37 <jwb> davej, you're on f15 right?
18:02:38 <davej> 15 is kinda stagnating until 3.3.1 lands.
18:02:49 <davej> I've got the rebase ready, just waiting for Greg to release it
18:03:06 <davej> had hoped that would have been this week, but it's looking more like next week
18:03:44 * brunowolff I mostly watching the blocker meeting, but will try to follow here as well.
18:03:56 <jwb> last kernel pushed was 2.6.42.13 (3.2.13), right?
18:04:07 <davej> yeah
18:04:21 <davej> if something else comes out between now and 3.3.1, I'll push it if it's important
18:04:27 <davej> it's the only reason I've not committed the rebase yet
18:04:44 <davej> but it would have to be something pretty critical
18:04:49 <jwb> #info F15 currently at 2.6.42.13 (3.2.13).  Waiting for 3.3.1
18:05:06 <jwb> ok.  seems pretty quiet otherwise
18:05:16 <jforbes> considering how long it takes to push an F15 update to stable
18:05:36 <jwb> #topic F16/F17
18:05:38 <jforbes> F15 users could really help that out by testing and giving karma as appropriate
18:05:46 <jwb> jforbes, true
18:06:03 <jwb> #info testers/karma needed for F15 as it stagnates in updates-testing
18:06:22 <jwb> ok, so F16/F17 are both on 3.3 at the moment
18:06:27 <jwb> and should be almost identical
18:06:54 <jwb> we rebased F16 early this time, and it closed out quite a few bugs
18:07:08 <jwb> of course, more got opened, but it seems to have been a net benefit for us
18:07:46 <jwb> we'll pick up 3.3.1 as soon as it comes out
18:08:15 <davej> since last week, 159 new f16 bugs opened. 76 closed.
18:08:25 <davej> (including dupes)
18:08:40 <davej> looks like still quite a few dupes open there too.
18:08:55 <jwb> yeah, probably.  i know some of the new ones aren't on 3.3 either.  still from 3.2
18:09:08 <jwb> so two things we fixed this week of note
18:09:13 <jwb> 1) ASPM regression
18:09:48 <jwb> 3.3 has a commit that causes some machines to either not boot at all due to ASPM changes, or it will do weird things like cause jmicro sata controllers to basically break
18:10:02 <davej> I just ran this weeks bug stats for those curious.. http://codemonkey.org.uk/2012/03/30/weekly-fedora-kernel-bug-statistics-march-30-2012/
18:10:04 <jwb> mjg59 figured that one out and we included the patch.  should be in updates-testing right now
18:10:21 <jwb> #info Weekly bug stats: http://codemonkey.org.uk/2012/03/30/weekly-fedora-kernel-bug-statistics-march-30-2012/
18:10:38 <jwb> bug 2) i915 hibernate fix
18:10:50 <jwb> i really hesitate to call it THE fix, but it's certainly at least a fix
18:10:56 <davej> I'm pretty confident in that fix
18:11:02 * jsmith cheers
18:11:04 <davej> I don't think airlied needs to worry about buying beer for a while
18:11:13 <jwb> davej, yeah, definitely
18:11:24 <jwb> it just isn't going to fix everyones issues, that's all
18:11:36 <davej> yeah, still a lot of unrelated hibernate problems to fix
18:11:49 <davej> but that should close so many 'weird shit happened' bugs over the next few weeks
18:11:53 <jwb> somewhat disappointingly, it seems the unlock_new_inode issue still hits for a couple of people after including that
18:12:04 <jwb> i need to go look and see if they were using i915 though
18:12:44 <jwb> anyway, that patch went into f16/f17 today.  should get pushed to an update really soon now
18:12:59 <jwb> anything else on f16/f17
18:13:36 <jwb> #info i915 and ASPM fixes queued up in f16/f17
18:13:49 <jwb> is there anything we need to discuss for F17 beta before we move on to rawhide?
18:14:09 <jwb> seems the Beta kernel  is going to be 3.3.0-1.fc17
18:14:21 <davej> Dan Walsh mentioned something yesterday about needing something in for beta, but didn't give me any details.
18:14:26 <jwb> which is kinda old, but adamw might kill me if i ask for a newer one
18:14:32 <davej> jwb: I told him to bug you
18:14:36 <jwb> fair
18:14:52 <davej> but yeah, unless it's something critical, sounds like post-beta
18:14:56 <jwb> going to drive adamw crazy (or me) if it's really critical
18:14:59 <adamw> jwb: yes. yes, you would be dead.
18:15:17 <jwb> #info F17 Beta kernel is 3.3.0-1.fc17
18:15:32 <davej> at this point the only things we care about for beta kernel is "anaconda doesn't work unless we have this patch"
18:15:39 <jwb> yeah
18:15:44 <davej> and even then, it would have to affect a significant number of people
18:15:56 <jwb> i wonder if 3.3.0-1 has the broken irqpoll patch
18:16:12 <jforbes> I think it did
18:16:49 <davej> 17 also still has a bunch of annoying things, like that timekeeping printk/spew that we should silence for final
18:16:55 <jwb> it does
18:17:01 <davej> getting tired of seeing that bug reported
18:17:27 <jwb> davej, did you write up a patch for that?
18:17:46 <davej> not yet. I can do it though.
18:18:03 <jwb> #action davej/jwb to write patch to shut up timekeeping 11% skew message
18:18:35 <jwb> at least the irqpoll thing is just a "update your kernel" kind of issue
18:18:39 <jwb> ok, move on?
18:18:51 <jwb> #topic Rawhide
18:19:14 <jwb> jforbes, you wanna cover this one?
18:19:31 <jforbes> So rawhide is rebasing daily through the merge window, we are building now, and yesterdays rebase is in the repo
18:19:59 <jforbes> There are a couple of interesting pieces, PTP support being one
18:20:30 <jwb> #info rawhide currently at 3.4-rc0 (post 3.3 git snapshots)
18:20:46 <jforbes> I expect Sunday to be the end of the merge window, so we will know exactly what we should end up with featurewise in 3.4
18:20:47 <jwb> jforbes, there's a legal block on the ptpd-phc userspace package now
18:21:05 <davej> jwb: ugh, license problem ?
18:21:23 <jforbes> jwb: fair enough, but at least now people wishing to build the userspace themselves won't have to also build a new kernel
18:21:31 <jwb> davej, someone pointed out a couple of previous reviews of different forks and something about IETF <blah>
18:21:35 <jwb> spot is looking at it
18:21:43 <davej> I blame spot.
18:21:44 <jwb> jforbes, true
18:22:08 <jforbes> In other good news, our patch count is going down quite a bit, bug fixes are making the merge window
18:22:17 <jwb> nice
18:22:52 <jwb> anything else on rawhide?
18:22:54 <jforbes> our NFS patches, a few random bug fixes and virtio-scsi have all been dropped as patches because they are upstream
18:23:20 <jforbes> nothing else yet.  I will likely build today, and hopefully monday or tuesday we will have the rc1 build
18:23:51 <davej> oh, I have something
18:24:02 <davej> thoughts on increasing the size of the dmesg buffer again ?
18:24:14 <davej> with systemd spewing stuff to it, the early boot stuff is always cut off.
18:24:18 <jwb> for rawhide only?
18:24:31 <davej> at the least, we should do it for debug/rawhide builds
18:24:46 <jwb> yeah, i was going to say it would probably be good in debug builds too
18:24:59 <jforbes> I don't see a reason not too, especially for debug builds
18:25:16 <jwb> #agreed increase the size of the dmesg buffer for rawhide/debug builds
18:25:18 <jforbes> Even for release builds, it's not a bad idea
18:25:34 <davej> I note we're currently at 128K, this moves it to 256K.
18:25:41 <davej> it's not like it's megabytes of ram here
18:26:17 <jwb> so move LOG_BUF_SHIFT=18 then
18:26:29 <davej> I should bug util-linux to change the default -s for dmesg too. (It's something silly like 16K)
18:26:31 <jforbes> Right, and it is a very worthwhile use of another 128k, though I expect some of the arm folks might prefer something smaller
18:26:53 <jwb> they can override it in config-arm-generic
18:26:55 <davej> yeah, arch overrides would be understandable for lowmem platforms
18:27:06 <davej> and given arm doesn't even use config-generic right now..
18:27:16 <jwb> it sort of does for some platforms
18:27:21 <jwb> it's just there are too many of them
18:27:23 <jforbes> Hmph
18:27:25 <davej> oh, I missed that
18:27:38 <jwb> they have config-arm-generic, config-arm-omap-generic
18:27:47 <jwb> i think those actually are smaller overrides
18:27:59 <jwb> there are a few that are just full configs though
18:28:02 <davej> right, but those don't inherit from config-generic do they ?
18:28:08 <jwb> i think they do
18:28:11 <davej> oh, great
18:29:32 <jwb> #action set CONFIG_LOG_BUF_SHIFT=18 in config-generic.  other arches can override in arch specific configs
18:29:59 <jwb> anything else on rawhide?
18:30:10 <jforbes> nope, that should make today's buidl
18:30:24 <jwb> #topic kernel autotest
18:30:56 <jwb> we had a discussion brainstorming what we want to do for performance and regression testing of the kernel
18:31:09 <jwb> this is one of the goals the kernel team is trying to focus on this year
18:31:50 <jwb> the summary is that we're going to use the autotest framework and start with small 'does it boot' tests
18:31:56 <jwb> jforbes, you have that pretty much done, right?
18:32:02 <jwb> or it's trivial to do anyway
18:32:21 <jforbes> Yes, that part is done from the local side, I suppose I should post the control script somewhere
18:32:38 <jwb> #info kernel performance/regression testing one of the goals the Fedora kernel team is working on this year
18:33:03 <jwb> yeah, would be good to get out there
18:33:13 <jforbes> We actually assume in the control script that you already have a VM ready for testing, though we can post the instructions for it to do an auto install too
18:33:38 <jwb> might be good to do a small write up to the mailing list?
18:34:28 <jforbes> Yup, actually probably best to do a wiki page, and follow it up with a write up to the mailing list that points to it
18:34:36 <jwb> yeah, perfect
18:34:41 <jwb> hang it off the main Kernel page
18:35:13 <jwb> so we could also ask the community if they know of small, self-contained tests we could run as well, right?
18:35:26 <jforbes> So the next thing we want to look at is writing more comprehensive regression tests, or getting some contributed from others
18:35:31 <jwb> heh
18:36:17 <jforbes> ideally I think we have a 'make test' target, or a test launching script in a kernel-tests package.  Autotest can call it, and people who don't want to mess with autotest can run it locally on their machines
18:36:22 <jwb> #help If community members want to contribute regression tests, please email the kernel list with suggestions/tests.
18:36:46 <jforbes> not that single machine autotest is very difficult
18:37:21 <jwb> right, but it lowers the barrier if we don't require it
18:37:35 <jwb> at least for local runs
18:37:50 <jforbes> sure, and fairly unnecessary if people are booting into the kernel anyway
18:39:03 <drago01> use vms?
18:39:21 <jwb> vms == Virtual Machines ?
18:39:52 <jforbes> autotest does with the current control script
18:39:56 <drago01> jwb: yes
18:40:03 <jwb> yeah, what jforbes said :)
18:40:19 <drago01> ok ;)
18:40:23 <jforbes> though it can be made to control a test host that isn't a vm it is just a more elaborate setup
18:41:47 <jwb> anything else on this?
18:42:12 <jforbes> No, though I would love to hear some community input
18:42:26 <jforbes> I will specifically ask for it in the mailing list post
18:42:30 <jwb> cool
18:42:54 <jwb> oh, it's worth pointing out we're going to start with regression tests.  performance testing will come later, and probably on a specific set of machines
18:44:22 <jwb> ok, that pretty much covers the (one line) agenda we had
18:44:32 <jwb> #topic Open Floor
18:44:40 <jwb> questions, other topics?
18:45:08 <drago01> jwb: I should probably file a bug instead of complaining in every meeting / on irc but ... also didn't shut up yet ;)
18:45:13 <drago01> *alsa
18:45:24 <jwb> yeah, i emailed about that last time.  i got no reply
18:45:33 <jwb> i can poke them again
18:45:37 <drago01> I did the same in 2008 ;)
18:45:46 <jwb> drago01, or file a bug in the alsa project might be best to be honest
18:45:59 <drago01> jwb: ok
18:45:59 <jwb> they seem somewhat responsive on their bug tracker thing
18:47:34 <jwb> anything else?
18:48:08 <davej> quiet week.
18:48:25 <jwb> got a number of bugs fixed though, so not a bad week
18:48:29 <jwb> even if bugzilla says otherwise
18:48:56 <jwb> ok, going to close out the meeting in 30 sec
18:49:36 <jwb> #endmeeting