On Apr 26 2007 09:40, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>
>For example, I can certainly say that after 2.6.21, I'm likely to be very
>unhappy merging something that isn't "obviously safe". I knew the timer
>changes were potentially painful, I just hadn't realized just *how*
>painful they would be (we had some SATA/IDE changes too, of course, it's
>not all just about the timers, those just ended up being more noticeable
>to me than some of the other things were).
Perhaps do one at a time [ at the cost of queueing other stuff, yeah :( ]
Like: 2.6.21 - only NO_HZ & hrtimers, and the SATA code in .22. Probably does
not work out in reality, so perhaps just live with long rc cycles.
(Let rc8 come.)
>So we should have somebody like Christoph running -mm, and when things
>break, we'll just sic Christoph on whoever broke it, and teach people
>proper fear and respect! As it is, I think people tend to send things to
>-mm a bit *too* eagerly, because there is no downside - Andrew is a "cheap
>date" testing-wise, and always puts out ;)
Yes, perhaps we need a weakchanges-mm ("weak" is inteded, not to be confused
with week) that can carry stuff like doc updates, Kconfig updates, etc. -
patches that are a little more than -trivial.
Jan
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
