All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>
Cc: arcml <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: WTF: patch "[PATCH] ARC: Support syscall ABI v4" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 4.7-stable tree?
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 08:28:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160907062852.GA1287@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1e3ae422-d8ff-326e-29bd-b58002b5163b@synopsys.com>

On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 01:28:45PM -0700, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On 09/06/2016 01:22 PM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > > Not "we need to support gcc6 for
> > > old kernels", as really, if someone wants to update userspace, they
> > > don't update their kernel?
> 
> FWIW, I'm not arguing for the backport inclusion - I'm just trying to explain the
> context more.
> 
> Thing is your regular user/customer don't really care/know about these details. So
> there are tools bugs and more often than not the easy answer for tools providers
> is "this is a known issue in gcc x.y which has been fixed in gcc x2.y2 so consider
> upgrading". So it is for such class of users that having such backports makes life
> a little easy.

That's fine, but who would be upgrading their userspace gcc and then
wanting to rebuild their kernel for an old kernel release?  What
prevents them from also updating their kernel?

I understand the context, I'm just trying to say that this really is a
"new feature" you are wanting here from what I can tell.  I'd recommend
just having people upgrade their kernel :)

thanks,

greg k-h

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (Greg Kroah-Hartman)
To: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
Subject: WTF: patch "[PATCH] ARC: Support syscall ABI v4" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 4.7-stable tree?
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 08:28:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160907062852.GA1287@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1e3ae422-d8ff-326e-29bd-b58002b5163b@synopsys.com>

On Tue, Sep 06, 2016@01:28:45PM -0700, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On 09/06/2016 01:22 PM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > > Not "we need to support gcc6 for
> > > old kernels", as really, if someone wants to update userspace, they
> > > don't update their kernel?
> 
> FWIW, I'm not arguing for the backport inclusion - I'm just trying to explain the
> context more.
> 
> Thing is your regular user/customer don't really care/know about these details. So
> there are tools bugs and more often than not the easy answer for tools providers
> is "this is a known issue in gcc x.y which has been fixed in gcc x2.y2 so consider
> upgrading". So it is for such class of users that having such backports makes life
> a little easy.

That's fine, but who would be upgrading their userspace gcc and then
wanting to rebuild their kernel for an old kernel release?  What
prevents them from also updating their kernel?

I understand the context, I'm just trying to say that this really is a
"new feature" you are wanting here from what I can tell.  I'd recommend
just having people upgrade their kernel :)

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-07  6:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-05 13:03 WTF: patch "[PATCH] ARC: Support syscall ABI v4" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 4.7-stable tree? gregkh
2016-09-06 16:50 ` Vineet Gupta
2016-09-06 19:38   ` gregkh
2016-09-06 20:21     ` Vineet Gupta
2016-09-06 20:21       ` Vineet Gupta
2016-09-06 20:28       ` Vineet Gupta
2016-09-06 20:28         ` Vineet Gupta
2016-09-07  6:28         ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2016-09-07  6:28           ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2016-09-07 16:38           ` Vineet Gupta
2016-09-07 16:38             ` Vineet Gupta
2016-09-09 11:39             ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2016-09-09 11:39               ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2016-09-09 17:08               ` Vineet Gupta
2016-09-09 17:08                 ` Vineet Gupta

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160907062852.GA1287@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com \
    --cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.