On Apr 26 2007 09:40, Linus Torvalds wrote:
quoted text
>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.)

quoted text
>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
-- 
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/