linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PATCH] scsi fixes for 2.6.25-rc2

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: <20080223124445.db779e3c.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:44:45 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] scsi fixes for 2.6.25-rc2

On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:31:02 -0800 (PST) Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > 
> > I know I am probably shooting myself in the foot here, since I am the original
> > author of mvsas, but...
> > 
> > Should we be adding new drivers during -rc?
> 
> I'm personally of the opinion that a new driver that doesn't add anything 
> but itself (ie no infrastructure changes etc) is fine. I'd rather have a 
> new, rough driver that might work, than no driver at all, and it's not 
> like it can cause a regression if you don't enable it.
> 

Yes, I too think that adding new standalone code in late -rc is OK.

Especially drivers, because a new driver is a bugfix for people who own
that hardware!
--
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/