[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Linux 2.6.21

    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.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-04-26 22:03    [W:0.020 / U:17.592 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site