[08:29] <apw>  /b 2
[10:51] <zequence> Any chance one could sync linux-rt from Debian?
[10:53] <zequence> And just keep it in sync with security updates and such, through a special SRU process?
[10:54] <zequence> Haven't actually tried one of those kernels on Ubuntu, and I'm pretty oblivious to what they could be missing in terms of Ubuntu specific patches
[10:56] <zequence> But, assuming they would work, it would seem like a lot less work compared to the alternative, which we are considering: to re-introduce a linux-rt variant of the Ubuntu kernel.
[10:56] <henrix> zequence: just out of curiosity: is linux-rt the preempt-rt patched kernels?
[10:57] <apw> i thought that patchset was mostly dead now
[10:57] <zequence> No, it's still alive :)
[10:57] <apw> and ... there is no linux-rt source package in debian
[10:59] <zequence> hmmm, no they don't seem to have that for jessie
[11:00] <zequence> But, there are for wheezy, and in sid they have 3.14
[11:01] <apw> what do they call it even
[11:01] <apw> as rmadison cannot find it
[11:01] <zequence> try linux-image-rt-amd64
[11:02] <henrix> well, i problem i see is with linux-rt is that they pick only specific kernel versions for their patchset, and they don't match ubuntu kernel versions
[11:02] <henrix> (well, they support 3.2 and 3.8. but not 3.13 for ex)
[11:03] <apw> you are never going to be able to be on an ubuntu chosen kernel with their workflow
[11:03] <apw> what do you think you are going to get for all that pain?
[11:04] <zequence> a few ms more, basically
[11:04] <apw> an do you need it, or is that just something that makes you hot
[11:05] <apw> as the release schedules for debian and ubuntu do not line up
[11:05] <apw> you have no guaretee of any kind of security support at all on a synd
[11:05] <apw> synced kernel from debian, i think you are asking for a world of pain
[11:06]  * apw cannot really understand how so many years have gone by and this is not yet in mainline
[11:07]  * apw loves the way the current documentation talks about natty
[11:08] <zequence> Well, it's just an idea. I would need to do some real testing to find out the pros and cons with lowlatency vs rt. I do know that -lowlatency is just on the limit of acceptance in some cases, so it is at least interesting to find out
[11:08] <zequence> ..and what the choices could be
[11:10] <apw> well you should be able to copy the source package, which i have yet to find still
[11:10] <apw> into a ppa and let it build, and see what happens
[11:11] <apw> zequence, what is the source package for those
[11:12] <lag> apw: Hola
[11:13] <apw> lag, hi
[11:13] <lag> apw: Are you well?
[11:13] <zequence> apw: I think it's it's the same source for all linux kernels, not sure.
[11:13] <apw> lag, yeah, you?
[11:14] <lag> apw: Yeah, doing well thanks
[11:14] <lag> apw: I think I found a checkpatch false positive 
[11:14] <lag> apw: ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/mfd/88pm80x.c
[11:14] <zequence> apw: linux-latest for the latest. Really haven't checked out that at all.
[11:15] <lag> apw: It appears your script doesn't know about SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS()
[11:15] <apw> lag, there are many of them indeed
[11:16] <apw> lag, email it to me and joe
[11:16] <apw> lag, and ignore it if it is wrong, you are allowed to
[11:16] <lag> apw: I'll collect them and send a batch email
[11:16] <apw> sounds good
[11:16] <lag> apw: Ta
[11:17] <apw> zequence, so yeah that makes your life very painful as it will make heaps of kernels but ... hey that is what PPAs are for, making a mess
[11:23] <apw> zequence, so i'd suggest step one is to copy the source from debian into a ppa and see what happens
[11:23] <zequence> apw: Ok, thanks. I will try that.
[11:48] <apw> henrix, this backport for teh CVE, i am damned if i can see why its not a cherry-pick 
[11:49] <biswass> Hi, I am facing a kernel panic during boot, and it has been quite frequent in the last couple of weeks. I am using 3.13.0-16-generic with Ubuntu 1404 LTS. I have tried reporting the bug with apport, but it says that the package is not an official Ubuntu package.
[11:49] <apw>  linux | 3.13.0-24.46  | trusty           | source
[11:49] <apw>  linux | 3.13.0-24.47  | trusty-security  | source
[11:49] <apw>  linux | 3.13.0-24.47  | trusty-proposed  | source
[11:49] <apw>  linux | 3.13.0-24.47  | trusty-updates   | source
[11:50] <apw> biswass, no indeed as the release kerenl is -24 that makes sense
[11:50] <biswass> Ah okay, thanks. So then why is it that my kernel version is not getting updated?
[11:50] <biswass> How can I update my version to the latest build?
[11:51] <apw> biswass, no idea how you have such an old version, is this a desktop or server
[11:52] <apw> it should be asking you to update in the general case
[11:52] <biswass> This is a desktop, and I have a regular Ubuntu LTS and get regular updates. 
[11:52] <biswass> apw, Yeah right, that is how it should be.
[11:53] <apw> biswass, and is indeed what happens on the kit i am using right now
[11:53] <apw> biswass, so what does this command say: dpkg -l linux-image-* | grep 'ii'
[11:53] <apw> biswass, you may want to pm me the results rather than spam here
[11:58] <apw> biswass, ok you have lost your meta packages
[11:58] <apw> biswass, "apt-get install linux-generic" should sort you out
[11:59] <apw> which should install the meta packages depending on the latest kerenls
[11:59] <apw> you should see a kernel more like -24.47 installed as a result
[12:01] <henrix> apw: oh, it is *almost* a cherry-pick :)
[12:02] <henrix> apw: it won't be a clean cherry-pick in munlock_vma_page() -- you need a minor adjustment
[12:02] <henrix> apw: but yeah, calling it a backport is probably too much :)
[12:04] <henrix> apw: my rule is: if it is not a clean cherry-pick, i call it backport.
[12:05] <apw> then it is a backport, i just can't see the differnce :)
[12:05] <apw> henrix, oh but why quantal backport and not quantal main
[12:07] <henrix> apw: i believe there won't be any other quantal kernel, but i may be wrong (i was wrong last week)
[12:07] <henrix> bjf: ^
[12:07] <henrix> hmm... bjf isn't around
[12:07] <apw> no indeed
[12:08] <henrix> ok, i'll ping him once he's around later today
[12:09] <apw> henrix, i'll just reply and mention it in the thread, then it won't get lost
[12:09] <apw> and you don't have to wait on him
[12:09] <henrix> apw: ack, thanks
[16:09] <apw> smb, you know how to test iscsitarget i am sure, and of course you are running utopic :)
[16:09] <smb> apw, the answer is no anyway :-P
[16:10] <apw> smb, no to both ?
[16:11] <apw> smb, i just uploaded a "fixed" version of iscsitarget to utopic, i guess i need to find someone who does use it
[16:12] <smb> apw, no to the first as in not from the top of my head. the utopic part not yet
[16:14] <smb> apw, Maybe I could bring up a VM to test... but then so could you...
[16:15] <apw> smb, on i can install it, but have literally no idea how to use it :)
[16:15] <apw> one of those things i was hoping you were familiar with
[16:16] <smb> Yeah, every now in a while. Usually have to figure out where I maybe wrote down how