Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 17 Apr 2002 05:27:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 17 Apr 2002 05:27:48 -0400 Received: from mole.bio.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.36.9]:35181 "EHLO mole.bio.cam.ac.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 17 Apr 2002 05:27:48 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020417101412.066cd4a0@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 10:26:17 +0100 To: Martin Dalecki From: Anton Altaparmakov Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.5.8 IDE 36 Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , "David S. Miller" , david.lang@digitalinsight.com, vojtech@suse.cz, rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3CBD2847.6010003@evision-ventures.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org At 08:46 17/04/02, Martin Dalecki wrote: >Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >>My understanding it that Tivo behaves like some Amiga's here >>and has broken swapping of the IDE bus itself, not the ext2 >>filesystem. >>On PPC, we still have some historical horrible macros redefinitions >>in asm/ide.h to let APUS (PPC Amiga) deal with these. >>Now, the problem of dealing with DMA along with the swapping is >>something scary. I beleive the sanest solution that won't please >>affected people is to _not_ support DMA on these broken HW ;) > >No: the sane sollution would be to not support swapping disks between >those systems and other systems. No it isn't. You can't just go removing features people use. Your attitude as the new IDE maintainer is a bit distressing. In the sake of a cleanup you start throwing away one feature after the other. IMHO cleanups are not worth feature removal, obviously your opinion differs. Hopefully, we will see the features come back but still the interim is annoying for some people... Also, even more distressing is that you seem to be almost completely unresponsive to bug reports about your IDE changes completely breaking IDE. My email reporting in detail how any post 2.5.7 kernel fails to boot due to hanging during IDE device discovery was left unanswered. Off-line I am told you responded to another similar bug report trying to shift the blame to someone else's code and when it became apparent it was the IDE code you just stopped responding. Do you expect everyone to understand IDE and find and fix your bugs? A maintainer of a subsystem should work with people to find bugs and fix them, not expect users to do that... Your IDE patches keep flowing in one after the other but you completely ignore the fact that you broke IDE for some people along the way and the chances of it fixing itself by accident are minute... and finding the bug is probably getting harder with every patch you submit... This is _not_ what I would expect from a maintainer of such an important subsystem! Apologies for the rant but I feel a lot better now. Best regards, Anton -- "I've not lost my mind. It's backed up on tape somewhere." - Unknown -- Anton Altaparmakov (replace at with @) Linux NTFS Maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.openprojects.net WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/ - 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/