On Tue, 2026-08-11 at 12:05 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> This probably needs to be updated in lockstep with other lttng*
> recipes (modules, tools), and so they all must fit the criteria, or
> you need to find out if one can be updated without the others.
>
I think they can be updated independently.

Currently in each version, they do not match their versions:
Scarthgap:
./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_2.13.10.bb
./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-modules_2.13.12.bb
./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-tools_2.13.13.bb

Wrynose:

./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_2.14.0.bb
./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-modules_2.14.4.bb
./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-tools_2.14.1.bb

master:
./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_2.15.1.bb
./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-tools_2.15.1.bb
./meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-modules_2.15.2.bb

I have added already a patch for lttng-tools in the previous batch.
I'll check lttng-modules

Cheers,
Daniel

> Alex
>
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 at 11:19, <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Daniel Turull <[email protected]>
> >
> > lttng-ust maintains a branch per minor series (stable-2.13 through
> > stable-2.16) and releases from several at once: 2.14.2 and 2.15.1 went out
> > the same day in May 2026, and three series together in February, 2.13.10,
> > 2.14.1 and 2.15.0. So upgrades within a major.minor are stable point
> > upgrades per the OE-Core stable release policy (ref-manual, "Stable Point
> > Release Upgrades"). There is no written policy document, so qualification
> > rests on that branch structure and the release contents below.
> >
> >
> > https://docs.yoctoproject.org/dev/ref-manual/release-process.html#stable-point-release-upgrades
> >
> > https://github.com/lttng/lttng-ust/tree/stable-2.15
> >
> > Upstream keeps a ChangeLog with a per-release entry list, and every entry
> > for the one point release in the current series is labelled a fix. 2.15.1
> > (May 22 2026) covers a negative error code on incorrect message size, a
> > shmp() return value checked before dereference, an underflow warning in
> > zero_file, uninitialised LTTNG_UST_LFILE and sigevent structs, close_range
> > inefficiency and excessive fd-tracker memory use, and a NULL check in
> > ustctl. The one non-fix entry changes a likely to unlikely branch hint.
> >
> > Only one point release exists in the 2.15 series so far, so this also
> > rests on the 2.13 series' record, which ran to ten.
> >
> > Already tracked this way on the OE stable branches, counting only bumps
> > since each branch forked: kirkstone took 2.13.5 -> 2.13.6 and scarthgap
> > 2.13.7 -> 2.13.8 -> 2.13.10. wrynose has taken none and sits at 2.14.0.
> >
> > AI-Generated: Kiro with Claude Opus 5
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Turull <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_2.15.1.bb | 4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_2.15.1.bb 
> > b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-
> > ust_2.15.1.bb
> > index 9f1d0961a1..5d2ce3d0b4 100644
> > --- a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_2.15.1.bb
> > +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_2.15.1.bb
> > @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ PYTHON_OPTION = 
> > "am_cv_python_pyexecdir='${PYTHON_SITEPACKAGES_DIR}' \
> >                   
> > PYTHON_INCLUDE='-I${STAGING_INCDIR}/python${PYTHON_BASEVERSION}${PYTHON_ABI}'
> > \
> >  "
> >
> > -inherit autotools lib_package manpages python3native pkgconfig
> > +# lttng-ust publishes bugfix/security-only releases on its per-minor
> > +# stable-X.Y branches, the same upstream and release model as lttng-tools.
> > +inherit autotools lib_package manpages python3native pkgconfig 
> > upstream-stable-release-point
> >
> >  include lttng-platforms.inc
> >

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#243182): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/243182
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/120699046/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to