linux-kernel - Re: easy alsa patches for the stable kernel?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46E2E099.9040402@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Sat, 08 Sep 2007 19:49:13 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@...mhuis.info>
CC:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
	Romano Giannetti <romano@....icai.upcomillas.es>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	roger@...puter-surgery.co.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	perex@...e.cz
Subject: Re: easy alsa patches for the stable kernel?

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 08.09.2007 01:38, Takashi Iwai wrote:
[backports to -stable]
>> Linux will suck really if one breaks so-called stable thing easily
>> without actually testing.  For stable stuff, "it should be good" isn't
>> enough.  It must be: "it IS good."

This applies (or should apply...) to everything that goes to Linus in
his pre -rc1 merge windows.  To post -rc1 submissions and even more so
to -stable submissions, additional criteria apply.

However, there are special kernel trees out there which accept
backports.  Linux distributors do backports, because they have the means
to do so.

> Linux IMHO will suck even more if crucial pieces of hardware does not
> work for people easily, because Linux won't get even used then and will
> frustrate people.
> 
> Don't get me wrong; I understand and agree mostly to the points you
> raised. But we nevertheless need to find a way to make todays hardware
> usable more quickly, as that hardware is often on the market only for
> some months or a year until the successor-model replaces it (which might
> need new drivers or workarounds) --

In the end there is but one solution to this:  Open specs.

> but it sometimes even for small
> alsa-fixes takes as many months to make it from the developers out to
> the kernel and from there to the distributions the user uses.
> 
> It works better in some areas of the kernels (SATA and Network drivers
> come to my mind) where patches make it quicker into the linus- and
> stable-kernels -- in parts that is due to better cooperation with the
> hardware-vendors, but it seems the sub-tree maintainers have a better
> patch-/workflow, which has a strong impact as well.

Feature additions to SATA and networking, e.g. support of additional
hardware, are not backported to -stable or merged post -rc1 either, I
presume.  Maybe they are better in getting stuff ready in time before
merge windows open --- I don't know, I don't watch these subsystems.
Maybe they have less trouble with closed or nonexisting specs...?
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== =--= -=---
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
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/