03:00 < BenC> Welcome everyone
03:01 < BenC> For reference, the meeting agenda is at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
03:02 < BenC> I wanted to start off by noting some timeline for the kernel in feisty release schedule
03:02 < BenC> The -12 kernel was uploaded this weekend, and will be the kernel that goes into Thu's beta release
03:03 < BenC> I expect us to have one more kernel upload after the beta in time for the kernel freeze, which is April 4th
03:03 < BenC> we are currently still fixing as many bugs as possible, but on April 4th, we are fixing release-critical bugs only
03:03 < BenC> no new features
03:05 < BenC> so we have roughly 2.5 weeks till the kernel lock down...we may have another kernel upload between April 4th and April 12th for any critical bugs (April 12th is the scheduled release candidate)
03:06 < BenC> I should probably put this on the wiki somewhere so it's apparent how our plans work with the feisty release schedule
03:06 < BenC> Any questions about this timeline, changes we should make, maybe goals we should push for?
03:07 < BenC> How close we get to these dates really depends on whether we have an ABI bump or not
03:08 < BenC> pkl_, rtg__, kylem: Are there any issues that you know of that we need to concentrate on between now and release-candidate?
03:08 < rtg__> ACPI issues.
03:08 < BenC> rtg__: Specific ones?
03:08 < pkl_> Nothing critical
03:09 < kylem> BenC, i assigned a pile of bugs to myself that i'm trying to work through today
03:09 < kylem> BenC, mostly updates for stuff in ubuntu/
03:09 < BenC> kylem: Ok
03:09 < rtg__> There are lots of laptop related problems. I'm working on triaging some of those bug reports.
03:09 < BenC> ok, that brings me to new bug policies
03:09 < dholbach> bug 84359?
03:09 < Ubugtu> Malone bug 84359 in linux-source-2.6.20 "ATA: abnormal status 0x7F on port 0xD407" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/84359
03:10 < dholbach> oh sorry - don't want to disrupt
03:10 < pkl_> Is that the MBP bug?
03:10 < BenC> dholbach: Has that been retested against -12?
03:10 < BenC> -12 had a huge drivers/ata/ update
03:10 < dholbach> ok, I'll try in a bit
03:10 < dholbach> it's not my main machine
03:11 < dholbach> i'll let you know
03:11 < BenC> dholbach: If it's still affected, mark it confirmed/critical and assign it to ubuntu-kernel-team please
03:11 < rtg__> BenC: I don't think there are any showstopper ACPI bugs, but there are lots of annoyances.
03:11 < dholbach> ok will do
03:11 < BenC> rtg__: Ok, annoyances have until April 4th, after that they remain annoyances for another release :)
03:11 < BenC> Back to bug policies. I went through a lot of bugs trying to clean things up to sync with the new policy: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeamBugPolicies
03:12 < BenC> rtg__, pkl_, kylem: That means I may have mistakenly changed some bugs assigned to you to the ubuntu-kernel-team
03:12 < kylem> ok
03:12 < kylem> not a big deal
03:12 < BenC> basically if a bug is just confirmed, it's assigned to the ubuntu-kernel-team pool, and if you are working on it, assign it to yourself and mark it In Progress
03:13 < BenC> sorry if that mucked your bug listings
03:13 < rtg__> Well, it wasn't a mistake in all cases.
03:13 < BenC> rtg__: For ACPI bugs, you may want to assign Confirmed bugs to the Kernel ACPI team, and request to be sub'd to that team
03:13 < BenC> rtg__: That way I get you and mjg59 looking at them
03:14 < rtg__> BenC: OK.
03:14 < BenC> same policy applies, when you actually start working on a particular bug, InProgress/Assign-to-self
03:14 < BenC> pkl_, kylem: Note the Triage days on that wiki page :)
03:16 < BenC> Anyone have any questions about the new policy? I know there are some differences between it and standard policy for launchpad bugs.
03:16 < BenC> Mainly that Confirmed bugs are never unassigned
03:16 < heno> Could some one on the kernel team add a few lines of wisdom to the last section of this page https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/Community/FAQ ? It's to help ISO testers know when to report a bug against the kernel (in very general terms)
03:16 < BenC> unlike other packages, we have more than one maintainer, and more than one group working on bugs in the same package
03:17 < BenC> heno: Sure
03:17 < heno> thanks
03:17 < BenC> Anyone volunteer? If not, I can do it later on today
03:17  * BenC holds back the volunteers horde :)
03:18 < kylem> hehe
03:18 < BenC> Ok, UDS and specs
03:19 < BenC> I expect this UDS to be a huge event for the kernel team...past UDS's the kernel has had no real discussions since I was judge/jury/executioner in most cases, and as much as I like talking to myself, scheduling discussions was a little pointless :)
03:20 < kylem> :)
03:20 < Treenaks> BenC: I have a piece of hardware to give to a kernel dev who wants to write a driver for it ;)
03:20 < Treenaks> (at UDS)
03:21 < BenC> Now that we have 3 new extremely capable people on the team, we can actually propose some development oriented specs
03:21 < BenC> Treenaks: I think I speak for the team when I say, "Yay, free hw" :)
03:22 < BenC> So anyone wanting to propose specs, please add it to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Roadmap
03:23 < BenC> I hope one of the next two meetings we'll start reviewing specs
03:24 < BenC> rtg__, pkl_, kylem: This is your chance to propose some more interesting things for your workload over the next 6 months :)
03:25 < rtg__> BenC: You mean something more fun then bug triage? Hooray.
03:25 < BenC> Also, if you see a proposed spec on that page and you want to claim it, prepend your name to it
03:25 < BenC> rtg__: I was going to propose a dedicated bug triager and nominate you :)
03:26 < pkl_> rtg: what could be _more_ fun tha bug triage? :-)
03:26 < rtg__> I'll save my rude words for later :)
03:26 < BenC> hehe
03:26 < BenC> Well, we're down to discussing a new time for this meeting
03:27 < BenC> unfortunately at this time, Kyle and I both are supposed to be doing another thing, but kylem is having to accomodate, and I had to decline
03:27 < kylem> i'm still here.
03:27 < pkl_> a proposed spec is up for grabs then?  Not owned by the proposer?
03:28 < BenC> pkl_, kylem, pkl_: Any preferred day?
03:28 < kylem> any day is fine
03:28 < BenC> pkl_: It depends on the spec, but ones I've listed on the RoadMap or up for grabs
03:28 < pkl_> Not Monday or Friday...
03:29 < BenC> I was thinking Tue...that sound good for you guys?
03:29 < rtg__> BenC: Please avoid anytime after Wednesday 3P MST (UTC-6)
03:29 < rtg__> BenC: Tuesday is fine.
03:29 < BenC> same time 15:00 UTC
03:29 < kylem> tuesday works well for me.
03:29 < rtg__> BenC: Works for me.
03:29 < pkl_> Sounds fine.
03:30 < BenC> Ok, Tue's at 15:00 UTC it is
03:31 < BenC> And now we'll open the floor for a few minutes for any general topics/questions
03:32 < _MMA_> Hi guys. I was wondering if there can be anything done to better the -lowlatency kernel?
03:33 < _MMA_> Ive been testing the current one and getting good results so far.
03:33 < BenC> _MMA_: well, we were hoping the Ubuntu Studio team would tell us these things :)
03:33 < _MMA_> Nice latency timings with Ardour.
03:33 < pkl_> But?  Why would you want to better it then?
03:33 < BenC> Unless there's some additional config options we can change, I'm thinking the current lowlatency kernel is what we'll release
03:34 < _MMA_> Some of the users that have come to the channel who have tested noticed when using alot of MIDI their timings get worse.
03:34 < BenC> there's very little chance of any patches being accepted
03:34 < BenC> _MMA_: has anyone made any suggestions on improving it outside of "Include Ingo's patchset"?
03:34 < _MMA_> On user mentioned a "FULL_PREEMPT kernel option" but crimsun said we dont have that.
03:35 < _MMA_> I could have my terms off sorry.
03:35 < crimsun> the preempt in -lowlatency is as "full" as it gets
03:35 < BenC> _MMA_: current lowlatency has 1000HZ and full -preempt turned on
03:35 < BenC> right
03:35 < kylem> BenC, what's our plan for driver updates? )
03:35 < kylem> :)
03:36 < BenC> Ah, good question
03:36 < kylem> guess where that one came from. :P
03:36 < BenC> I suspected :)
03:36 < _MMA_> BenC: Sure I know. It was just mentioned to me. If what we have is as full as it gets Ill have to go back through the logs and find that users name to chat with him.
03:36 < BenC> I'm sort of hoping we have a last minute driver to include where we can test the driver-updates stuff
03:37 < BenC> _MMA_: Sure, ping us on #ubuntu-kernel if you find anything we can do easily in the constraints we have for upcoming freeze/release
03:37 < kylem> BenC, i have code that i can't release until may.
03:38 < BenC> kylem: It's sort of two fold, we have the ubiquity capability to install extra driver deb's, and we have the linux-backports-modules-2.6.20 package we can add to (it's empty now)
03:38 < _MMA_> BenC: Ok. I have some questions as well that might better help me field user questions.
03:38 < BenC> kylem: Does install depend on it?
03:38 < kylem> BenC, nope. it will chug along just fine with vesa.
03:38 < BenC> kylem: Then it's a candidate for linux-backports-modules
03:39 < kylem> BenC, will that end up in -updates or just -backports?
03:39 < BenC> kylem: Does it require Xorg stuff too?
03:39 < kylem> BenC, yeah.
03:39 < BenC> kylem: Not sure we've discussed that...probably a good topic to bring up with Colin
03:39 < kylem> ok.
03:41 < BenC> any other questions/topics?
03:43 < BenC> I think that concludes our meeting
03:43 < BenC> thanks everyone for coming

MeetingLogs/Kernel/20070319 (last edited 2008-08-06 16:14:04 by localhost)