On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:16:50PM -0800, Scott Branden wrote: > On 2021-02-18 10:36 a.m., Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 07:20:50PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > >> 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. > > > > Ok, great! > > > > That's one person/company saying they can help out (along with what CIP > > has been stating.) > > > > What about others? Broadcom started this conversation, odd that they > > don't seem to want to help out :) > Greg, I'm sorry but I'm not in a position to provide such a commitment.
Ok, who at Broadcom do I need to talk to to get that type of commitment? > My original question arose because the 5.10 kernel is declared as 2 years LTS > while older LTS kernels are now 6 years. > One problem this has created is requests to provide silicon support in an > older kernel version (for a new project) rather than starting from a newer > kernel version that more properly supports the (silicon and non-silicon) > features. Sounds like your development model is broken, again, who do I need to talk to in order to help you all fix this? thanks, greg k-h
