David Miller wrote:.. Absolutely, though to a varying degree. That's the responsibility that goes with the role of a subsystem maintainer. I once had such a role, and gave it up when I felt I could no longer keep up. You still keep refering to it as "your (my) bug". It's not. I had nothing to do with it, other than stumbling over it. When people stumble over a libata bug, I look hard to see if my code could possibly cause it. Jeff looks even harder, because he's the current subsystem dude for libata. I never suggest a user search through a mountain of unrelated commits for something I've screwed up on. I give more directed help, patches to collect more relevant information, and patches to try and resolve it. The last thing I'd ever do, is diss the reporter. Regards. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Heiko Carstens | [patch -mm] s390: struct bin_attribute changes |
| Andrew Morton | 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 |
| Eric W. Biederman | Re: [PATCH] kexec: force x86_64 arches to boot kdump kernels on boot cpu |
| Jan Engelhardt | intel iommu (Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jens Axboe | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Andrew Morton | Re: [PATCH] PHYLIB: IRQ event workqueue handling fixes |
