Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
- From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 00:12:54 +0200
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 04:09:28PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 12:47:35AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 03:38:59PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 12:23:00AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Andrew Burri:
V4L/DVB: Add support for Kworld ATSC110
Curt Meyers:
V4L/DVB: KWorld ATSC110: implement set_pll_input
V4L/DVB: Kworld ATSC110: enable composite and svideo inputs
V4L/DVB: Kworld ATSC110: initialize the tuner for analog mode on module load
Giampiero Giancipoli:
V4L/DVB: Added support for the LifeView FlyDVB-T LR301 card
Hartmut Hackmann:
V4L/DVB: Added support for the ADS Instant TV DUO Cardbus PTV331
V4L/DVB: Added PCI IDs of 2 LifeView Cards
V4L/DVB: Corrected CVBS input for the AVERMEDIA 777 DVB-T
V4L/DVB: Added support for the new Lifeview hybrid cardbus modules
V4L/DVB: TDA10046 Driver update
V4L/DVB: TDA8290 update
Peter Hartshorn:
V4L/DVB: Added support for the Tevion DVB-T 220RF card
Hm, all of these patches seems like these are new features being
backported to the 2.6.16.y kernel, which is not really allowed under the
current -stable rules.
Or are these patches just bugfixes that fix with the current -stable
rules?
They add support for additional hardware to the saa7134 driver.
That's not a bugfix.
See below.
If you look at the actual diff there's not much that could cause any
regression since nearly all of these change don't change anything for
the already supported cards.
I'm not disagreeing about the regression issue. I'm just concerned
because you are starting down the slope of "backporting new driver
support" to the 2.6.16 tree, and that's something that I thought you did
not want to do.
But if it is, let us know, and we can discuss it.
I always said that things like adding new PCI IDs are OK for 2.6.16.
As long as there's not a serious risk of regressions, such additions are
welcome in 2.6.16.
Are you sure? That really goes against the -stable rules as we
originally set them out to be.
If you want to accept new drivers and backports like this, I think you
will find it very hard to determine what to say yes or no to in the
future. It's the main problem that everyone who has tried to maintain a
stable tree has run into, that is why we set up the -stable rules to be
what they are for that very reason.
My primary priorities are:
- no regressions
- security fixes
If adding support for hardware without a very low regression risk is
possible (bugfixes usually have a much higher risk), I don't see the
point against doing it.
If adding support for hardware would have a regression risk I'll always
say no - no matter how important the hardware is (I'd expect this e.g.
in the near future for SATA).
I do know that the only value of the 2.6.16 tree lies in a lack of
regressions and act accordingly, and as soon as people will report
regressions compared to earlier 2.6.16 kernels I'll know that I'll have
done something wrong (but I haven't yet gotten such bug reports).
"is not really allowed under the current -stable rules" is a bit hard to
answer, but considering that "Missing PCI id update for VIA IDE" was OK
for 2.6.17.12 I'd say it's consistent with what you are doing.
That was a bugfix as the driver could not access that device without
that fix. Just adding a device id is not something that we normally
will take, as that is what the sysfs "newid" is for. That patch was
obviously something else.
I read the changelog differently.
Anyway, I'm not really seeing any non-academical difference between "as
the driver could not access that device without that fix" and "adding
support for a device to a driver" - it's all about a device that tdidn't
work before and does work after the patch.
thanks,
greg k-h
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
- From: Adrian Bunk
- Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
- From: Greg KH
- Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
- From: Adrian Bunk
- Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
- From: Greg KH
- Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Advertise PPPoE MTU / avoid memory leak.
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH -mm] swsusp: Add support for swap files
- Previous by thread: Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
- Next by thread: Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
