Re: DSA concerns for jessie architectures
* Andreas Barth (firstname.lastname@example.org) [130622 20:06]:
> Different answers - select the one you like most:
> 1. We could buy a some loongson 2f machines (or newer), see e.g.
> plus some memory. These machines have kernels in the archive, and not
> the hardware bug with choking on too many nop-instructions in a row.
> 2. We get the kernel team to accept the additional kernel config for
> 2e (I'm too lazy now to search for the bug report from ages ago, but
> the only difference needed to build kernels for our 2e-machines is an
> additional kernel config, no code changes necessary)
> 3. We have currently two new machines with loongson 3a processors to
> test. It will take a bit of time to finally get a working kernel on
> these, but that would also decrease build-times quite much.
Currently mipsel is still marked as with DSA-concerns. Is the third
option enough for DSA that the concerns are reasonably addressed for
the moment (and the comment could be removed), or do we need to push
on one of the other options as above?