Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261354AbVCDGt4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:49:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262564AbVCDGtz (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:49:55 -0500 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:9130 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261354AbVCDGsH (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:48:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:47:59 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: Andrew Morton Cc: Chris Wright , jgarzik@pobox.com, olof@austin.ibm.com, paulus@samba.org, rene@exactcode.de, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, greg@kroah.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec Message-ID: <20050304064759.GP5389@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> References: <422756DC.6000405@pobox.com> <16935.36862.137151.499468@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20050303225542.GB16886@austin.ibm.com> <20050303175951.41cda7a4.akpm@osdl.org> <20050304022424.GA26769@austin.ibm.com> <20050304055451.GN5389@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> <20050303220631.79a4be7b.akpm@osdl.org> <4227FC5C.60707@pobox.com> <20050304062016.GO5389@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> <20050303222335.372d1ad2.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050303222335.372d1ad2.akpm@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1764 Lines: 45 * Andrew Morton (akpm@osdl.org) wrote: > Chris Wright wrote: > > > > * Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@pobox.com) wrote: > > > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > >Chris Wright wrote: > > > >>Olof's patch is in the linux-release tree, so this brings up a point > > > >>regarding merging. If the quick fix is to be replaced by a better fix > > > >>later (as in this case) there's some room for merge conflict. Does this > > > >>pose a problem for either -mm or Linus' tree? > > > > > > > >It depends who gets to Linus's tree first. If linux-release merges first, > > > >I just revert the temp fix while adding the real fix. But the temp fix > > > >should never have gone into Linus's tree in the first place. > > > > Consider it first patch in fixup series ;-) Actually I meant fix 1/2 == quick, fix 2/2 == more complete. > Here's the second, and this is much more critical. > > And it's untested. I'd rather it be tested.../me keeps wishing If it's untested, are we even sure it fixes the problem? Or are you worried about the umpteen other non-Dell laptops that could have problems with the patch? > And it's a temp-fix - it'll be addressed by other means in 2.6.12. > > What do we do? IMO, we have to rely on Dmitry's judgement. Is it critical (i.e. broke laptops how)? Can it be worked around with the i8042.noacpi boot param? If so, I don't think it fits the bill as critical. thanks, -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/