Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764191AbXLPJXy (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Dec 2007 04:23:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756108AbXLPJXo (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Dec 2007 04:23:44 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:37256 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756076AbXLPJXm (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Dec 2007 04:23:42 -0500 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 10:22:43 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: "John W. Linville" Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Michael Buesch , Daniel Walker , akpm@linux-foundation.org, stefano.brivio@polimi.it, Ray Lee , matthias.kaehlcke@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mbuesch@freenet.de, linux@bohmer.net, kjwinchester@gmail.com, jonathan@jonmasters.org, Linus Torvalds , bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: wireless: bcm43xx: big_buffer_sem semaphore to mutex Message-ID: <20071216092243.GB27280@elte.hu> References: <20071213003028.676998182@mvista.com> <20071214175910.GA27078@elte.hu> <200712141938.10733.mb@bu3sch.de> <200712150225.52183.rjw@sisk.pl> <20071215214300.GC3096@tuxdriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071215214300.GC3096@tuxdriver.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1579 Lines: 35 * John W. Linville wrote: > > It's not that simple. For example, regression testing will be a > > major PITA if one needs to switch back and forth from the new driver > > to the old one in the process. > > Not really true -- a single system can easily have firmware installed > for b43, b43legacy, and bcm43xx at the same time and switch back and > forth between them. as long as the version 4 firmware blob is present in the system, will testers have a fully fluid test- and work-flow when migrating across from bcm43xx to b43, without any other changes to an existing Linux installation? (i.e. no udev tweaks, no forced upgrades of components, etc.) Will it Just Work in bisection as well, when a tester's kernel flip/flops between bcm43xx and b43 - like it does for the other 3000+ drivers in the kernel? Note that we are _NOT_ interested in "might" or "can" scenarios. We are interested in preserving the _existing_ bcm43xx installed base and how much of a seemless migration the b43 transition will be. _THAT_ is what the "no regressions" upstream rule is about, not the "ideal distro" scenario you outline above. It is YOUR total obligation as a kernel maintainer to ensure that you dont break old installations. How hard is that to understand? This is not rocket science. Ingo -- 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/