[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061028010855.GA22273@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:08:55 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [RFC: 2.6.19 patch] let PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE depend on BROKEN
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 03:38:54PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 00:23:26 +0200
> Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de> wrote:
>
> > ...
> > > So no, this should not be marked BROKEN.
> > >
> > > It's a very experimental feature, as the help text says. If you can
> > > think of any harsher language to put in that text, please let me know.
> >
> > The problem is that if only 1 out of 100 people who are compiling a
> > kernel accidentally enable this option, linux-kernel will be swamped
> > with bug reports...
> >
>
> Yes, that's a legitimate practical concern, IMO.
>
> I guess many of the people who test -rc kernels have sufficient familarity
> to know to disable this option, but a lot of the people who test major
> releases do not. So how about we mark PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE as broken in
> 2.6.19-rc6, then revert that change in 2.6.20-rc1, and keep doing that
> until the feature is ready?
Ok, I can live with that. I'll send in a change for this with the next
round of driver core fixes.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists