Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751221AbWCBMYp (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 07:24:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751335AbWCBMYp (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 07:24:45 -0500 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([212.18.232.186]:9226 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751221AbWCBMYo (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 07:24:44 -0500 Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 12:24:09 +0000 From: Russell King To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Arjan van de Ven , Jens Axboe , Dominik Brodowski , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: add another ide-cs CF card id Message-ID: <20060302122409.GD14017@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Jeff Garzik , Arjan van de Ven , Jens Axboe , Dominik Brodowski , Linux Kernel References: <200603012259.k21MxBXC013582@hera.kernel.org> <44062FF1.4010108@pobox.com> <20060302075004.GA17789@isilmar.linta.de> <4406D44A.4020101@pobox.com> <1141299117.3206.37.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20060302114220.GH4329@suse.de> <1141301225.3206.50.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <4406E1C7.7020908@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4406E1C7.7020908@pobox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2359 Lines: 51 On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 07:15:03AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Arjan van de Ven wrote: > >Sure I can it being nice to CC linux-ide ANYWAY, but, to be honest, > >while I see that is important for changes to the driver that change the > >structure of it and how it interacts with the IDE layer, I fail to see > >the hard required reason for that for just adding a *PCMCIA* ID. > > > >I think Jeff is a bit overreacting in this case. > > About a quarter of the time when non-netdev maintainers add IDs, through > the magic of merges, we've wound up with duplicate IDs in the driver. > I've snipped several duplicate IDs from tulip and other net drivers over > the years. > > Further, in the past Brodo has _already_ been asked to CC relevant > maintainers and lists -- or at least LKML -- with his patches. He has > established a pattern of lacking time to add CC's to his emails; it > wasn't just this incident. > > Where is the peer review? I think it's fairly safe and obvious to say that Dominik is the peer review for these tables - he _is_ the PCMCIA maintainer, he _is_ arguably the maintainer for the ide-cs driver, he _is_ the person who invented these tables, he _is_ the one taking patches from people to add IDs, he _is_ the one reviewing such patches. If you want to know what's going on in PCMCIA land, subscribe to linux-pcmcia. In the same way that if you want to know what's going in in IDE land, you subscribe to linux-ide, or PCI land linux-pci, SCSI land linux-scsi, network land netdev. Using your argument (which seems to be demanding that any patch to any IDE driver no matter how trivial must be on linux-ide) that a patch to a PCI network device driver must be copied to linux-pci and netdev even though it may not touch the PCI specific code. What about a cardbus network card? Should any patch no matter how trivial be sent to netdev, linux-pci and linux-pcmcia - all those three mailing lists are within the "sphere of influence" of any patch to that driver. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core - 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/