Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758262AbYBWQGq (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:06:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752435AbYBWQGg (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:06:36 -0500 Received: from vs166246.vserver.de ([62.75.166.246]:50263 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752251AbYBWQGg (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:06:36 -0500 From: Michael Buesch To: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: bcm43xx regression in 2.6.24 (with patch) Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:05:59 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) Cc: Alexey Zaytsev , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <47BEAF3B.3080809@protei.ru> <200802221848.37902.mb@bu3sch.de> <20080223110751.GN23833@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20080223110751.GN23833@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200802231706.00163.mb@bu3sch.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2527 Lines: 58 On Saturday 23 February 2008 12:07:51 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Michael Buesch wrote: > > > > If this is not a repgession, than I don't know what is. And if it is > > > a regression, it should be fixed at least in the 2.6.24.y series, do > > > you agree? > > > > No. Playing with kconfig SELECT is really _nothing_ for a -stable > > series. I am _not_ going to be responsible for any breakages. [...] > > well, i've reviewed this thread and it's pretty apparent to any outside > observer that you as a maintainer are ignoring Alexey Zaytsev's pretty > reasonable request for a fix. > > Alexey had a problem, he analyzed it, he found a fix which he tested, > and he even has offered to test anything you send his way: > > || I have provided a patch that I believe is trivial, that I have tested > || with all possible config option combinations I thought were possible, > || and that fixes the regression. If you have a reason to believe it is > || wrong, please say it, I won't be offended. If there is a problem with > || the patch, I'll gladly fix and resend it. > > that's about the most friendly tester attitude that is imaginable. > > but what were you able to make out of that positive attitude? The only > things i've seen you send his way were insults and general handwaving > about how his patch breaks stuff (without providing a _shred_ of > evidence). blah: > I have to say, after having observed multiple incidents around b43 in > the past few months you are one of the worst driver maintainers i've > ever seen on lkml: you are ignoring regressions, you are frequently > insulting our testers and now you even have the gall to NAK a patch to > _your own buggy driver code_ without providing an alternative fix. > Kudos. So I am forced to sign-off random patches people send to me? I explained why I do not. If you do not like that, please do sign it off. If you do think the patch is correct, please _do_ sign it off Ingo. This problem will fix itself by switching to b43 and dropping bcm43xx. _That_ is my way to fix the bug. I don't understand all the SELECT implications, so I'm not going to introduce more of them. Because if the next regression appears from I SELECT that I signed off goto blah; -- Greetings Michael. -- 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/