Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210428110536.edy74gsobkgtd6al@ubuntu> <YIlCzOl/rkYeOWVW@kroah.com>
 <56ea648f-3742-6dd6-9deb-5f1ba441905f@perex.cz> <YIlT0KKfT6QaE8mz@unreal> <20210428123205.nkxunwubdogjyvmq@burgerking>
In-Reply-To: <20210428123205.nkxunwubdogjyvmq@burgerking>
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 28 Apr 2021 14:37:33 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hRBYtAG-_PUDN5WiDYhW0jcGDMMb7frd0G5x0+KwcY8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: mark isapnp as obsolete
To:     B K Karthik <bkkarthik@pesu.pes.edu>
Cc:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Anupama K Patil <anupamakpatil123@gmail.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
        kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 2:32 PM B K Karthik <bkkarthik@pesu.pes.edu> wrote:
>
> On 21/04/28 03:23PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 02:17:00PM +0200, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> > > Dne 28. 04. 21 v 13:11 Greg KH napsal(a):
> > > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 04:35:36PM +0530, Anupama K Patil wrote:
> > > >> isapnp code is very old and according to this link
> > > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_Plug_and_Play#Specifications
> > > >> from Wikipedia, even Windows Vista disabled ISA PnP by default.
> > > >>
> > > >> This change is in follow up to
> > > >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210422180322.7wlyg63kv3n2k6id@ubuntu/T/#u
> > > >> and https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210424194301.jmsqpycvsm7izbk3@ubuntu/T/#u
> > > >>
> > > >> Suggested-by: B K Karthik <bkkarthik@pesu.pes.edu>
> > > >> Signed-off-by: Anupama K Patil <anupamakpatil123@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > Has the maintainer said this is unsupported?
> > >
> > > I've no idea, if there're any users at the time, but there are many drivers
> > > which depend on this code.
> >
> > IMHO, this is exactly "Odd fixes" - code not really dead, but not really
> > alive too.
>
> Okay! Does this have to come around as a v2 with 'Odd Fixes' instead of obsolete?
> Or should that be a separate patch?
>
> Or should we just wait for the maintainer's reply?
> Sorry i'm a little confused.

I don't think that the MAINTAINERS entry needs to be updated.

Technically, this code is maintained, but because the availability of
systems on which to test changes is kind of limited, intrusive
functional changes in it should better be avoided.

Thanks!