On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 09:58:36AM +0300, Timo Aaltonen wrote: > Christopher James Halse Rogers kirjoitti 28.9.2022 klo 10.07: > >It's not entirely clear to me what you want to do here. > > > >If you need to fix some bugs in Jammy, and updating to thermald 2.5.0 is > >basically the same as applying all the patches you'd need, then you can > >just upload 2.5.0 and justify it in the SRU bug.
> I've uploaded a backported thermald to jammy queue, anyone willing to have a > look? Focal is next once this is accepted. This upload seems to contain various changes that aren't covered by SRU bugs - for example to consider the risk of regression in changing that code, or how you plan to test those fixes. So I don't think this fits the conditions that Christopher noted above. If you want to update thermald with a major version bump on the basis of hardware enablement for new hardware, then that would be justifiable as an SRU under existing policy, but we need to ensure that we do not regress existing hardware or functionality. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/thermald provides some justification there, but I don't think it's complete. For example, is it possible that users are using thermald on hardware not covered by upstream tests? By "all the unit tests must pass in all the supported Intel CPUs", who defines "supported"? Is it possible that Ubuntu users have hardware not covered by that definition of "supported"? Is there any risk to users of non-Intel hardware? How complete is upstream's test coverage? What assurance is there that there will be no feature regressions? For example, take the following upstream commit, which I think is being included in this proposed SRU: https://github.com/intel/thermal_daemon/commit/7e490fc79d784b3faf8314af98ec14981ba7fb75 If this code path was being used previously, I think that would be a functional regression. 1) Is this safe in relation to Ubuntu kernel versions? 2) Did this actually get checked before upload? 3) What in your proposed QA process would catch this kind of change to ensure that the specific requirements for each such deprecation is met in Ubuntu stable releases?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- Ubuntu-release mailing list Ubuntu-release@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
