Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161191AbWHJMAy (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:00:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161193AbWHJMAy (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:00:54 -0400 Received: from hp3.statik.TU-Cottbus.De ([141.43.120.68]:55498 "EHLO hp3.statik.tu-cottbus.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161191AbWHJMAx (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:00:53 -0400 Message-ID: <44DB1F19.8000504@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:57:13 +0200 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.0.5) Gecko/20060721 SeaMonkey/1.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Bunk CC: Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com>, Pavel Machek , Josh Boyer , Greg KH , linux-kernel Subject: Re: Adrian Bunk is now taking over the 2.6.16-stable branch References: <200608091749_MC3-1-C796-5E8D@compuserve.com> <20060809220048.GE3691@stusta.de> In-Reply-To: <20060809220048.GE3691@stusta.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2004 Lines: 49 Adrian Bunk wrote: ... > I'm currently > going through all 2.6.17.7 and 2.6.17.8 patches looking for patches I > should apply. Suggested updates for drivers/ieee1394/: (from 2.6.17.2) Fix broken suspend/resume in ohci1394 should be applicable as-is. This does not add full suspend/resume functionality to ohci1394 but it fixes fatal side effects on other on-board hardware after resume. (from 2.6.17.8) ieee1394: sbp2: enable auto spin-up for Maxtor disks doesn't apply to 2.6.16 as-is. https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=183011#c6 has an adapted version. I will mail it to you with proper description and signed-off-by later today. While I am at it, I will resend that ohci1394 patch too. I have a related question about your plans with Linux 2.6.16.yy. Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt says: - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something critical. I plan to submit a patch of the kind "fix recognition of a quirky device" for 2.6.18. That patch does not fix an oops, hang, data corruption, or security hole. (The patch will fulfill all other criteria from stable_kernel_rules.) Do you consider "can't use that shiny device under Linux" as "oh, that's not good" in the context of Linux 2.6.16.yy? (I will not submit that patch for 2.6.17.y. I suppose I also wouldn't submit it for 2.6.18.1 if it came too late for 2.8.18. One reason for me to hesitate is because people who are able to patch their kernel can already get fully up-to-date ieee1394 drivers from me for kernels as old as 2.6.14.) -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-==- =--- -=-=- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - 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/