Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751882AbbFXJTU (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:19:20 -0400 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143]:65275 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750925AbbFXJTL (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:19:11 -0400 Message-ID: <558A760B.2030600@nod.at> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 11:19:07 +0200 From: Richard Weinberger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" CC: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , "backports@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Julia Lawall Subject: Re: Uses of Linux backports in the industry References: <55687D72.3070904@melag.de> <558A73D9.3060703@melag.de> In-Reply-To: <558A73D9.3060703@melag.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1949 Lines: 53 Am 24.06.2015 um 11:09 schrieb Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult: > Am 29.05.2015 um 17:01 schrieb Richard Weinberger: > > Hi, > >> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult >> wrote: >>> Am 29.05.2015 um 04:54 schrieb Luis R. Rodriguez: >>> Actually, I really wonder why folks are sticking to ancient kernels on >>> newer hardware. >> >> Enterprise distribution kernels. > > hmm, by "enterprise" you mean distros like RHEL, which even can't get a > dist-upgrade right ? ;-p Please send such prepubescent flames to /dev/null. > In that case, it's the duty of the dist vendor, to port their (often > horrible) vendor patches. I wouldn't run those distros bare-metal > anyways, so the need for new kernel features (eg. drivers) wouldn't > that huge. > >> Or "special" kernels like PREEMPT_RT. > > PREEMPT_RT is pretty close to upstream. > There're at 4.0.5 right now, and 4.1 is still very fresh. > > If I'd have the need for it (actually was already considering it for our > project), I'd rather port it to 4.1. (as our BSP already is at 4.1) Porting PREEMPT_RT is not that easy. Did you ever? >> Sometimes the vendor BSP is that horrid that a customer cannot afford >> to forward port it but wants recent stuff. So you need to backport... > > By "vendor BSP", you perhaps mean certain soc or board manufacturer > stuff ? Just dont use it, it's usually horrible crap anyways. These > usually are fire-and-forget showcases, not suited for production use. > Waste of resources. So, you rewrite all drivers and the board support from scratch? Interesting. I'd love to meet your customers they seem to have a lot of money and time. ;-) Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/