Sam Ravnborg wrote:Well, with due respect, it's a bit presumptuous to add a bunch of warnings to the kernel build (due to more strict checking), and then get annoyed when people aren't jumping up and fixing this stuff immediately. There were no build complaints in 2.6.24 for my stuff (libata and drivers/net) during my test builds, nor were there any for my 2.6.25-git merge window pushes, nor were there any complaints when I last checked Andrew's -mm tree. So from our perspective, you dumped a lot of work in our laps from out of the blue, getting irritated at us along the way. Maybe we can resolve this in a more kinder, gentler, coordinated fashion? :) What could be done to prevent this sort of situation in the future? Maybe add these checks to -mm, and then not push your strict checking upstream until the build noise is reduced? Jeff --
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.27-rc5 |
| Ingo Molnar | [announce] "kill the Big Kernel Lock (BKL)" tree |
| Christoph Lameter | Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH iproute2] Re: HTB accuracy for high speed |
