[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGngYiWWKOGvMUUXYqkvGVntCjhkG+BJ_JCTSWzrer4P9woSTA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:34:51 -0500
From: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Discussions about the Letux Kernel
<letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] SPI broken for SPI based panel drivers
Hi Linus,
On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 9:20 AM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> I don't know if much can be done about it other than
> having better programmers than me at the task. Or
> less tired when they write the patch. etc.
I don't think that we have many programmers that are
better than you :)
IMHO the fundamental dilemma is between features,
security and agility on the one hand, and stability on
the other. Too much emphasis on stability, and one
ends up with a system which is hard to change, i.e.
improve or keep secure. A system like that runs the
real risk of being rapidly overtaken by a more nimble
alternative.
More testing is good and will make breakages rarer,
but I guess we need to be realistic here and realize
that even with a huge community effort, we might
never get 100% or even 80% test coverage.
But to be honest these sound like questions for the
Greg KHs and Torvaldses of this world, not for me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists