Recent comments by Linux creator Linus Torvalds on the lkml about the state of non-compiling drivers suggest that current 2.6.0-test kernel development is indeed focused on getting to a stable 2.6.0 release. During an earlier discussion back in April, Linus suggested it was best to leave broken drivers in their broken state until someone with the hardware is able to look into fixing them [story]. However today in a dicussion with ARM Linux maintainer Russell King [interview], Linus suggested that it has become important to get all drivers fixed to the point that they can at least compile, even if the responsible developers don't have the necessary hardware to test the resulting binary. He explains:

"The intersection of people who have the hardware, and people who have the time/knowledge to convert a driver, may be empty. Expecially for odd hardware. So let's get those drivers compiling, even if we can't test them, so that others _can_ test them."

From: Russell King [email blocked]
To: Linus Torvalds [email blocked]
Subject: Re: Fix up riscom8 driver to use work queues instead of task queueing.
Date: 	Mon, 18 Aug 2003 19:28:31 +0100

On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 11:21:07AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Having done a few serial drivers (not because I want to, but because 
> nobody else seems to be doing them), I definitely see the need for both. 

Of course, the more correct approach is for someone to convert them to
use the new serial driver core (and fix the driver core interface to
allow them to work with it.)

Unfortunately I don't have the hardware for a lot of these specialist
serial cards, so it's a job I've steared clear of.  I've been hoping
that leaving them broken will make the ones which are used stand out,
and hopefully someone with the hardware would've picked them up and
done the necessary conversion.

But alas no.

(I did my best to convert dz.c without the hardware, but it seems to
have been lost into the depths of the MIPS tree... *hint*)

-- 
Russell King ([email blocked])                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html



From: Linus Torvalds [email blocked]
Subject: Re: Fix up riscom8 driver to use work queues instead of task queueing.
Date: 	Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:47:14 -0700 (PDT)


On Mon, 18 Aug 2003, Russell King wrote:
> 
> Of course, the more correct approach is for someone to convert them to
> use the new serial driver core (and fix the driver core interface to
> allow them to work with it.)

Hey, I'm all for that for 2.7.x. In the meantime, they've been broken for 
a year, so let's just try to fix them up into a "limping along" state.

I don't have the hardware either, but at least now they should be testable
on UP configurations (SMP is generally still broken due to the drivers
expecting to be able to disable all interrups globally instead of using
proper locking).

I'd be interested to hear whether the dang things work. Of course, there 
probably aren't that many people around with the hardware any more. I 
could just have added them to the BROKEN list, but since they _might_ work 
it seemed like a better idea to be hugely optimistic instead ;)

		Linus



From: Russell King [email blocked]
Subject: Re: Fix up riscom8 driver to use work queues instead of task queueing.
Date: 	Mon, 18 Aug 2003 19:59:03 +0100

On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 11:47:14AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I'd be interested to hear whether the dang things work. Of course, there 
> probably aren't that many people around with the hardware any more. I 
> could just have added them to the BROKEN list, but since they _might_ work 
> it seemed like a better idea to be hugely optimistic instead ;)

True.  However, there is the opposite point of view which is equally
valid.  There aren't many people with the hardware, and the people
that there are aren't interested in development kernel series, so
even if we did convert them during 2.7, we wouldn't hear about it
until 2.8.

IMO its far better to do these types of conversions when users are
interested in the driver (and can therefore give you bug reports)
than when they are actively ignoring the development series.

Both positions are equally valid.  I'm not going to argue that one
is more valid than the other because I have enough on my plate for
the time being. 8)

-- 
Russell King ([email blocked])                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html



From: Linus Torvalds [email blocked]
Subject: Re: Fix up riscom8 driver to use work queues instead of task queueing.
Date: 	Mon, 18 Aug 2003 12:10:17 -0700 (PDT)


On Mon, 18 Aug 2003, Russell King wrote:
> 
> True.  However, there is the opposite point of view which is equally
> valid.  There aren't many people with the hardware, and the people
> that there are aren't interested in development kernel series, so
> even if we did convert them during 2.7, we wouldn't hear about it
> until 2.8.

Yes. However, what worries me more is that there are people who have the 
hardware, but because the driver won't even compile for them, they just go 
"oh, well, I'll try it again when the _real_ 2.6.0 hits the streets".

Which obviously won't work.

So I'm trying to make sure that all the broken drivers are gotten to a 
working state. Right now, considering how long they've been broken, that 
means "it must compile" so that people can test them. 

The "leave it broken, so that somebody will fix it properly some day" 
approach is a fine one for early development series. But right now I'd 
prefer to see patches to make drivers compile cleanly, even if people 
can't test them on real hardware.

The intersection of people who have the hardware, and people who have the 
time/knowledge to convert a driver, may be empty. Expecially for odd 
hardware. So let's get those drivers compiling, even if we can't test 
them, so that others _can_ test them.

		Linus

• Archive of above thread
• KernelTrap interview with Russell King