From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 18:55:48 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1107231847520.4843@tiger>
References: <201105201306.31204.luke@dashjr.org> <BANLkTimOqhNEsBEg6f=nMiMJqYGNyFJmeQ@mail.gmail.com> <013811$4lfs6@fmsmga002.fm.intel.com> <201105211123.56053.luke@dashjr.org> <aefc95$1usaq@orsmga001.jf.intel.com> <20110528131920.GA10467@tugrik.mns.mnsspb.ru>
 <20110712171706.GA18414@tugrik.mns.mnsspb.ru> <CAOJsxLEz-fPnb9oYnLMk9UbGqgsfm-g1d2yH=TrEiEk7HvyQzA@mail.gmail.com> <20110722110806.GA29757@tugrik.mns.mnsspb.ru> <yun7h7atcty.fsf@aiko.keithp.com> <20110722202336.GA14375@tugrik.mns.mnsspb.ru>
 <yunsjpyrqf7.fsf@aiko.keithp.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <yunsjpyrqf7.fsf@aiko.keithp.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com>
Cc: Kirill Smelkov <kirr@mns.spb.ru>, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Ray Lee <ray-lk@madrabbit.org>, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org>
List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org

Hi Keith,

On Fri, 22 Jul 2011, Keith Packard wrote:
>> Sorry, to me it all looked like "UMS is being ignored forever".
>
> You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at
> this point, keeping it working while also adding new functionality
> continues to cause challenges. We tend to expect that most people will
> run reasonably contemporaneous kernel and user space code, and so three
> years after the switch, it continues to surprise us when someone
> actually tries UMS.

I know I sound like a broken record but I really wish you i915 devs were 
little more eager to revert broken patches early rather than late. I mean, 
this particular breakage was already bisected but nobody said or 
did anything - and it's not like it's the first time either!

I suppose I need to bribe Linus somehow to be more strict with you folks.

 			Pekka