[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071209152509.5c6e33a2@the-village.bc.nu>
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2007 15:25:09 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
> Newly broken ones will be regressions. How many do we fix by the
> change? On SATA, setting the correct transfer chunk size doesn't seem
> to fix many.
Regressions are not some kind of grand evil. Better to regress the odd
device than continue to break entire controllers.
> > Tejun - instead of backing out important updates for 2.6.24 we should
> > just blacklist that specific drive for now and sort it nicely in 2.6.25,
> > not revert stuff and break everyone elses ATAPI devices.
>
> We'll need to blacklist setting transfer chunk size, eek, and let's
> leave that as the last resort and hope that we find the solution soon.
> Blacklist takes time to develop and temporary blacklist for just one
> release doesn't sound like a good idea.
It seems to be sensible to me *if* it is just this one device we are
somehow confusing and that one device is holding up fixing everything
else.
--
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