Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp7491170pxb; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:26:16 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwayR4v+CYEh0yYu0xgavg1jvLA+ISTe+4yRA7l0ao//VVL4YbZ7l0tis6/uoA2468QTgIB X-Received: by 2002:aa7:ce15:: with SMTP id d21mr5581078edv.206.1613676376582; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:26:16 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1613676376; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=HBAFATjG/lGCaKVSqkZgXVOEiR7rCzvalSTEZmy9uwc/XUwzDh4pCYGAUyo/DFx6Gd O+WHsLUyy0HzKpKBykfoehdp8ku38Duw3xdT5nRLEJWXUNeK5+D2k87QUxGjivr1eush iv6mB7Bw54uYnvMgpz/+ivCqzXZEP6m8wvBu8xgYWeRD269z3SOABbWTWQdm4EiztjuG fYWNAhK9AynuLvfyhL5CUwJTbsNpgNkBuZecdc2xgqWLD+UQq4ItecuDuAjH+5NF/LGt eYFJB1XzQv2Hptds5707WHhYTYS+0pt9R8NEMaIgx4dR4MBxiDswBTAXbG24+RYcJoyj 6XHg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=Cv+FJLihSMumY8kKxhkHRHx82nuNehLe3k4kdLoBq3g=; b=YmyMSOZrgGDRarLcvelEDvpsqCPTanUznf3rBdQsBNHc5K+X1Y1CjVvQCRWG/YbGOU SgX7YZJOBg05rZWWb04igeiSxyjQ/XrDefZH+2x8v2Fz3H3JRxnNi/HchLWwhnIt7HIO Bk1zb99Lc/NnUIuy2tSTNYWeV6dPYRMrgTJcfAoshWSz9svv+vhUpgXh7Gup518D1OiV 8Zw+gYFrGv22+lNAxyzG+/5YSOmDGeaKhUCRmLwRxYqpzcyt8QqeT1upVhcYuSN3MGQ7 B+eK1puqry1ypBX2RaXH5ssNjIBI5x7npMmyUwSl18o6RWmtIuhFNGEQQZ+V2wZqVvYJ z3Dw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id lz18si4441451ejb.576.2021.02.18.11.25.51; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:26:16 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232889AbhBRTXX (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:23:23 -0500 Received: from wtarreau.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:49871 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231372AbhBRSVo (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 13:21:44 -0500 Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 11IIKoE1015408; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 19:20:50 +0100 Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 19:20:50 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Florian Fainelli , Sasha Levin , BCM Kernel Feedback , LKML , Linux ARM , Scott Branden Subject: Re: 5.10 LTS Kernel: 2 or 6 years? Message-ID: <20210218182050.GB15217@1wt.eu> References: <8cf503db-ac4c-a546-13c0-aac6da5c073b@broadcom.com> <20210218165104.GC2013@sasha-vm> <00b9e2fb-d818-58d6-edae-4dbd6aa814f7@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 06:53:56PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 09:21:13AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > As a company, we are most likely shooting ourselves in the foot by not > > having a point of coordination with the Linux Foundation and key people > > like you, Greg and other participants in the stable kernel. > > What does the LF have to do with this? > > We are here, on the mailing lists, working with everyone. Just test the > -rc releases we make and let us know if they work or not for you, it's > not a lot of "coordination" needed at all. > > Otherwise, if no one is saying that they are going to need these for 6 > years and are willing to use it in their project (i.e. and test it), > there's no need for us to maintain it for that long, right? Greg, please remember I expressed I really need them for slightly more than 3 years (say 3.5-4) :-) I'm fine with helping a bit more as time permits if this saves me from having to take over these kernels after you, like in the past, but I cannot engage on the regularity of my availability. Overall I think that a lot of people completely underestimate the amount of work it requires to maintain stable kernels, and how much it could be distributed. By having a bunch of users participate a little bit more (e.g. by sometimes backporting the patches that are essential to them, by testing what's relevant to their use case), it already offloads a lot of work. I don't think the extra work requires to be much organized if there are enough participants to share the efforts. Regards, Willy