From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030264AbVLMWCN (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:02:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030263AbVLMWCN (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:02:13 -0500 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([212.18.232.186]:27923 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030264AbVLMWCK (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:02:10 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:01:57 +0000 From: Russell King To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Simon Richter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, matthew@wil.cx, grundler@parisc-linux.org, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org, paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, lethal@linux-sh.org, kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp, dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] don't allow users to set CONFIG_BROKEN=y Message-ID: <20051213220157.GD24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Adrian Bunk , Simon Richter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, matthew@wil.cx, grundler@parisc-linux.org, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org, paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, lethal@linux-sh.org, kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp, dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org References: <20051211192109.GA22537@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051211193118.GR23349@stusta.de> <20051211194437.GB22537@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213001028.GS23349@stusta.de> <439ECDCC.80707@hogyros.de> <20051213140001.GG23349@stusta.de> <20051213173112.GA24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213180551.GN23349@stusta.de> <20051213200106.GC24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213201920.GT23349@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051213201920.GT23349@stusta.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 09:19:20PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 08:01:06PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > That means that the original review was _worthless_. It wasn't a > > review at all. > > > > So, what I am trying to get across is the need to show the _full_ set > > of changes to a default configuratoin when you disable CONFIG_BROKEN, > > which is trivially producable if you run the script I've already posted. > > > > You can even use that in conjunction with your present patch to produce > > a patch which shows _exactly_ _everything_ which changes as a result of > > disabling CONFIG_BROKEN. Surely giving reviewers the _full_ story is > > far better than half a story, and should be something that any change > > to the kernel strives for. > > > > If not, what's the point of the original change? > > The point is that I haven't yet heard any good reason for > CONFIG_BROKEN=y in a defconfig. I'm sorry, I feel like I'm beating my head against a brick wall. I have said everything that needs to be said, and made my position on this patch crystal clear. The patch to the ARM configuration files is nacked as it stands. Please go back and rework it along the guidelines I've pointed out several times in this thread and maybe then it becomes acceptable. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk (caramon.arm.linux.org.uk [212.18.232.186]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7C266886E for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 09:02:21 +1100 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:01:57 +0000 From: Russell King To: Adrian Bunk Message-ID: <20051213220157.GD24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20051211192109.GA22537@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051211193118.GR23349@stusta.de> <20051211194437.GB22537@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213001028.GS23349@stusta.de> <439ECDCC.80707@hogyros.de> <20051213140001.GG23349@stusta.de> <20051213173112.GA24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213180551.GN23349@stusta.de> <20051213200106.GC24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213201920.GT23349@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20051213201920.GT23349@stusta.de> Sender: Russell King Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, grundler@parisc-linux.org, matthew@wil.cx, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, lethal@linux-sh.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] don't allow users to set CONFIG_BROKEN=y List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 09:19:20PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 08:01:06PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > That means that the original review was _worthless_. It wasn't a > > review at all. > > > > So, what I am trying to get across is the need to show the _full_ set > > of changes to a default configuratoin when you disable CONFIG_BROKEN, > > which is trivially producable if you run the script I've already posted. > > > > You can even use that in conjunction with your present patch to produce > > a patch which shows _exactly_ _everything_ which changes as a result of > > disabling CONFIG_BROKEN. Surely giving reviewers the _full_ story is > > far better than half a story, and should be something that any change > > to the kernel strives for. > > > > If not, what's the point of the original change? > > The point is that I haven't yet heard any good reason for > CONFIG_BROKEN=y in a defconfig. I'm sorry, I feel like I'm beating my head against a brick wall. I have said everything that needs to be said, and made my position on this patch crystal clear. The patch to the ARM configuration files is nacked as it stands. Please go back and rework it along the guidelines I've pointed out several times in this thread and maybe then it becomes acceptable. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [2002:d412:e8ba::1] (helo=caramon.arm.linux.org.uk) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.54 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1EmIE2-000256-HO for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:02:43 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:01:57 +0000 From: Russell King To: Adrian Bunk Message-ID: <20051213220157.GD24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20051211192109.GA22537@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051211193118.GR23349@stusta.de> <20051211194437.GB22537@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213001028.GS23349@stusta.de> <439ECDCC.80707@hogyros.de> <20051213140001.GG23349@stusta.de> <20051213173112.GA24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213180551.GN23349@stusta.de> <20051213200106.GC24094@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20051213201920.GT23349@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051213201920.GT23349@stusta.de> Sender: Russell King Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, grundler@parisc-linux.org, matthew@wil.cx, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, lethal@linux-sh.org, paulus@samba.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Simon Richter , dwmw2@infradead.org, kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] don't allow users to set CONFIG_BROKEN=y List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 09:19:20PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 08:01:06PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > That means that the original review was _worthless_. It wasn't a > > review at all. > > > > So, what I am trying to get across is the need to show the _full_ set > > of changes to a default configuratoin when you disable CONFIG_BROKEN, > > which is trivially producable if you run the script I've already posted. > > > > You can even use that in conjunction with your present patch to produce > > a patch which shows _exactly_ _everything_ which changes as a result of > > disabling CONFIG_BROKEN. Surely giving reviewers the _full_ story is > > far better than half a story, and should be something that any change > > to the kernel strives for. > > > > If not, what's the point of the original change? > > The point is that I haven't yet heard any good reason for > CONFIG_BROKEN=y in a defconfig. I'm sorry, I feel like I'm beating my head against a brick wall. I have said everything that needs to be said, and made my position on this patch crystal clear. The patch to the ARM configuration files is nacked as it stands. Please go back and rework it along the guidelines I've pointed out several times in this thread and maybe then it becomes acceptable. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core