[08:04] <jibel> apw, it should. I'll check it.
[08:30] <jibel> apw, dkms tests are running with 3.12.0-1.3, but they didn't start automatically when the new kernel has been uploaded. I'll fix that.
[08:40] <smb> jibel, Don't expect him to answer any soon. He is in a different wor... err timezone
[08:41] <jibel> smb, np, I didn't expect any, I think i'll read the backscroll :)
[08:42] <smb> jibel, Ok, cool. :)
[11:05] <valentyn> Hello kernel-dev's. I found an IPv6 MTU path discovery bug, reported it to the kernel devs at netdev@vger.kernel.org...
[11:06] <valentyn> ... a patch was devised and David Miller accepted it for inclusion in stable ("queued up for stable")...
[11:07] <valentyn> ... now my question is: do these kinds of patches normally end up in the Ubuntu stable kernel automatically?
[11:08] <valentyn> (I realise that "these kind of" could mean anything - sorry for that)
[11:09] <valentyn> Just checking, in other words, if a bug fix *that has no related Ubuntu kernel bug* will - again, most likely - end up in the Ubuntu kernel.
[11:09] <henrix> valentyn: yes, we monitor the stable mailing list, where Dave sends these patches for the stable trees
[11:10] <henrix> valentyn: but if you provide me a link to this patch (e.g. SHA1 in netdev git), i can keep an eye on it
[11:14] <valentyn> henrix: I wouldn't know where that is. I only have the correspondence on the netdev mailing list :-S
[11:14] <valentyn> http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg254974.html
[11:15] <valentyn> and here http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg254973.html
[11:16] <valentyn> (Sorry, wrong order). But thanks anyway, I have some confidence that this will end up in stable without special care
[11:17] <henrix> valentyn: that's good enough for me ;) i'll add it to my list of patches i'm monitoring
[11:18] <valentyn> Thanks so much :-) Running self compiled kernels in a production environment is sooo 1996 ;-)
[11:18] <henrix> valentyn: btw, the ubuntu kernels are based on upstream stable kernels
[11:19] <henrix> valentyn: so, for ex, our saucy kernel is based on the 3.11 kernel. everything that hits upstream 3.11, will eventually be included in our saucy kernel
[11:21] <valentyn> OK. Well, I'm actually a bit confused by the fact that this rather intrusive MTU issue almost immediately boiled down to a kernel bug that must have been there for 6 months or more. I'm not really into kernel development - just a sysop :)
[11:22] <valentyn> ... which means that I also don't know much about kernel whereabouts, i.e. where does "stable" come from, who patches what etcetera etcetera.
[11:23] <valentyn> Hence my questions. Well, I'll just keep an eye on coming kernel updates and see if I find a changelog entry there.
[11:23] <valentyn> Thanks so far.
[11:23] <henrix> np
[13:43] <diwic> bjf, sconklin: some bugs in the latest sru cycle (e g bug 1236228) are having the "please test or your patch will be dropped" message, but missing the "this came from upstream stable" message
[13:43] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1236228 in linux (Ubuntu) "Dell vostro 5470 has mono speakers and broken headset mic" [Undecided,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1236228
[13:44] <diwic> bjf, sconklin did you forget to run the script that set the upstream patches to verification-done ?
[14:12] <bjf> diwic, i'll look at what happened with that bug but we don't run any such script
[14:13] <bjf> diwic, that's part of a LP process
[14:15] <diwic> bjf, ok, thanks. Also bug 1227093 seems to be affected
[14:15] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1227093 in linux (Ubuntu) "[haswell sony vaio pro] Internal microphone not working" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1227093
[14:44] <bjf> diwic, the patches for those bugs are in the kernel that is in -proposed right now. they "should" get closed when that kernel go to -updates
[14:46]  * ppisati -> out for a bit
[14:47] <diwic> bjf, sure. I'm just used to have this "this patch came from upstream stable and do not require verification", which usually follows right after the other message
[14:47] <diwic> bjf, it's that message that seems to be missing here for some reason
[14:47] <bjf> diwic, ok, let me check that
[14:52] <bjf> diwic, that commit came from upstream stable with the buglink. that's why it got spam'd with the request for verification
[14:52] <bjf> diwic, the right way to handle those is to change the verification-needed-saucy to verification-done-saucy
[14:55] <hallyn_> could someone please confirm in bug 1021271 that my last comment is accurate - about the best way to get HWE kernel on a precise box?
[14:55] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1021271 in linux (Ubuntu) "KVM "enabling virtualization on CPU0 failed"" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1021271
[14:59] <bjf> hallyn_, it should be linux-generic-lts-<series> to get the headers as well as the kernel
[15:02] <hallyn_> bjf: thanks, commented in the bug
[15:03] <diwic> bjf, hmm, I'm looking through bugs to show you what message I'm talking about, but I can't find it. Maybe it's added individually by kernel team members
[15:07] <bjf> diwic, i know that I've added that message in the past by hand
[15:07] <bjf> diwic, i saw the one you added and it looked almost exactly like what i would have done
[15:08] <diwic> bjf, ok, thanks for the clarification
[15:08] <bjf> diwic, np. it's hard to remember what gets done by computer bots and what gets done by human bots
[15:09] <diwic> bjf, heh, true
[15:16] <smb> hallyn_, Seems I can run kvm on my 4850e ok (precise kernel). Can try on an Opteron in a bit. 
[15:17] <apw> jamespage, openvswitch ... after our conv. last week I think we decided that that one is all in the main kernel, are you able to test the kernel in the ckt PPA and tell us that it is sufficient; and will you be handling deprecating that dkms package.
[15:18] <jamespage> apw, I will be able to test and I'll deal with deprecating the dkms package as well
[15:18] <jamespage> apw, but after next week
[15:22] <hallyn_> smb: heck it could be a bad bit in his bios - if another kernel works, then all the better.
[15:24] <smb> hallyn_, Could be a BIOS bug or iommu problem when other virt solution modules (like virtualbox are loaded). Reading through this: https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/5639
[15:27] <hallyn_> yeah but he insists he doesn't have virtualbox
[15:27] <hallyn_> newer kernels don't mind vbox enabled so another reason to jsut have him upgrade :)
[15:28] <smb> hallyn_, Surely cannot harm
[16:10] <smb> hallyn_, Just for the fun of it, Precise kernel and Opteron 6128, kvm works. And that one has at least support for nested paging and an Amd-Vi (iommu) (If they have not actually been using Amd-V meaning virtualization...)
[16:13] <hallyn_> his was what, a 4800?  i don't really know what their model #s mean :)
[16:38] <smb> hallyn_, Me neither. Just saw they had a message about nested page table support.. :)
[18:49] <rtg> jamespage, do we need iscsitarget_dkms in trusty?