omap fixes for v2.6.34-rc5
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: [PATCHv9 2.6.34-rc5 1/5] mxc: Update GPIO for USB support on Freescale MX51 Babbage HW
Next: 2.6.43 - Intel KMS - rendering broken
From: Linus Torvalds on 27 Apr 2010 11:40 On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > Please pull omap fixes from: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap-2.6.git omap-fixes-for-linus I pulled it this time, but I'm starting to get really irritated with you. These look like real fixes, but quite frankly, by -rc5, that IS NOT ENOUGH. They need to be _regressions_, not just cleanups and fixes for things that have never worked. And this is starting to be a pattern with the omap tree: you're not honoring the merge window properly. Just "it's a bug-fix" or "it's deleting unused code" is not enough. The point of the late -rc series is to fix problems from the merge window, not add new changes. I realize that you think that all the new changes are obviously good, but the fact is, bugs happen even in "obvious bug-fixes". And that's why we have the rule about late-rc pulls being about _regressions_ and/or major oopses/security issues. Not just random development that are meant to improve things. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Tony Lindgren on 27 Apr 2010 12:20 * Linus Torvalds <torvalds(a)linux-foundation.org> [100427 08:28]: > > On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > Please pull omap fixes from: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap-2.6.git omap-fixes-for-linus > > I pulled it this time, but I'm starting to get really irritated with you. > > These look like real fixes, but quite frankly, by -rc5, that IS NOT > ENOUGH. > > They need to be _regressions_, not just cleanups and fixes for things that > have never worked. And this is starting to be a pattern with the omap > tree: you're not honoring the merge window properly. > > Just "it's a bug-fix" or "it's deleting unused code" is not enough. The > point of the late -rc series is to fix problems from the merge window, not > add new changes. I realize that you think that all the new changes are > obviously good, but the fact is, bugs happen even in "obvious bug-fixes". > > And that's why we have the rule about late-rc pulls being about > _regressions_ and/or major oopses/security issues. Not just random > development that are meant to improve things. OK point taken. I should have dealt with this earlier. Will only queue regressions after -rc3 or so. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Linus Torvalds on 27 Apr 2010 12:50 On Tue, 27 Apr 2010, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > OK point taken. I should have dealt with this earlier. Will only queue > regressions after -rc3 or so. Note that the "only regressions" is certainly not a hard rule. Anything that would be valid for -stable is obviously always valid: security issues, major oopses etc etc. But the "only regressions" should kind of be the guiding line, and the others are more like "this is so serious that it should go in regardless of anything else". Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Tony Lindgren on 27 Apr 2010 13:00
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds(a)linux-foundation.org> [100427 09:31]: > > > On Tue, 27 Apr 2010, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > OK point taken. I should have dealt with this earlier. Will only queue > > regressions after -rc3 or so. > > Note that the "only regressions" is certainly not a hard rule. Anything > that would be valid for -stable is obviously always valid: security > issues, major oopses etc etc. Sure. > But the "only regressions" should kind of be the guiding line, and the > others are more like "this is so serious that it should go in regardless > of anything else". OK. I guess was using criteria like "this is needed to boot this and that board in a usable way" and "let's get all the fixes in" criteria, but that should have been done way earlier. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |