| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:06:44 +0000 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: Mark Lord <lkml@....ca> Cc: nigel@...el.suspend2.net, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management? On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 10:55:18AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote: > LKML is much more receptive to drivers that follow > the "release early, release often" mantra. Exactly. > Which means we really have to be more accomodating of > drivers that start out simple, and then gain all of the > non-essential capabilities gradually over time. We usually are, the endless flamewar lurkers might not :) > > Simple observation here shows much more hostility :) > to drivers that are simply "presented" as a complete whole. > Often for good reason -- starting out with a framework > and then adding the rest bit by bit allows for much better > peer review and feedback. *nod* > And not all devices / situations need power management, > and lack of documentation on the hardware often prevents > us from implementing it at the outset. *nod* So can be use Mark's excellent post as closing of this utterly useless thread and go on to real work now? - 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