Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758454AbYHHRwT (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Aug 2008 13:52:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751591AbYHHRwJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Aug 2008 13:52:09 -0400 Received: from mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.7]:52510 "EHLO mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751877AbYHHRwI (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Aug 2008 13:52:08 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 10:52:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Trent Piepho X-X-Sender: xyzzy@shell2.speakeasy.net To: Jean Delvare cc: "D. Kelly" , Sam Ravnborg , "mailing list: linux-kernel" , Linux I2C Subject: Re: Problem with restricted I2C algorithms in kernel 2.6.26! In-Reply-To: <20080808113753.03f49efe@hyperion.delvare> Message-ID: References: <5ab239b10807161233i6c1c4d0we01ea1b8e6ccaa5b@mail.gmail.com> <20080807131357.59399ddf@hyperion.delvare> <20080807181416.5de4ce6d@hyperion.delvare> <20080808113753.03f49efe@hyperion.delvare> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2295 Lines: 45 On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 16:41:10 -0700 (PDT), Trent Piepho wrote: > > Expecting every developer to keep abreast of linux-next and the tens of > > thousands of patches it gets just isn't realisitic. > > > > The embedded platforms I develop on won't run linux-next. Continuously > > porting them to linux-next is simply impossible. The man hours required to > > do that would be staggering. > > Once again a "believe me it's impossible" without any good reason > given. I fail to see why embedded platforms would be any different from > other platforms or subsystem trees. Please enlighten me. Because they usually require lots of additional patches that aren't in the kernel. Sometimes embedded developers try to get these patches into the mainline kernel, but some maintainers aren't interested in accepting patches that don't appear to be useful to desktop users. > > The pool of testers available to a driver that requires running linux-next > > is going to be orders of magnitude less that a driver that can be compiled > > out of tree against 2.6.19 to 2.6.27. > > Except that distributions start packaging linux-next, while in general > they don't package out-of-tree versions of packages that are also > available in the kernel tree. If the v4l-dvb tip was in linux-next (it Sure they do. There are packages of the latest v4l-dvb, nvidia and ATI drivers, and more. There is even a system, DKMS, used to allow kernel module source packages to be installed and automatically rebuilt for new kernels. You can install and run a new module without even rebooting. Installing linux next is quite a bit more complex. Users won't test your driver if they have to install a new kernel for every revision. It's a nightmare for development too. I can't develop the entire kernel, it's too big and there are too many changes. If my driver has become unstable, is it something I did or one of the 20,000 patches that have appeared in linux-next? Like Mike said, one needs a stable platform to develop on. -- 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/