From: Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
To: <jt@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: Dominik Brodowski <linux@brodo.de>, <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<mika.penttila@kolumbus.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: get initialization ordering right [Was: [PATCH 2.5] : i82365 & platform_bus_type]
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:48:22 -0600 (CST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0303041123210.992-100000@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030304171640.GA16366@bougret.hpl.hp.com>
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 08:35:05AM -0600, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> >
> > This patch is completley untested, but it should work.
>
> I think you are hitting the nail on the head, various people
> are doing many "obvious" changes all over the place without bothering
> to check them, resulting in non functional code.
> That's not the way I want to work, and that's why I won't
> commit the new Wireless Extensions stuff until I can really test it.
Whoa, calm down.
The patch was meant essentially for Dominik only, so he could verify that
it worked with his new PCMCIA code. The only reason the patch is untested
is because I don't have the hardware in question.
The reason the patch was unwritten in the first place is because, as I
mentioned in the previous email, no one has used this feature. Dominik
followed the usage model exactly, and the feature was simple, and
predefined. That's the only reason it was obvious, and sent in the first
place.
Surely you're sore that your code has required some modifications since
Dominik has started working on PCMCIA, and I'm sure that no harm was
intended. It's had some bumps, but IMO, he's done a great job, and the
result is a vast improvement. The least you could is give the guy some
slack, instead of whining about your own inconveniences.
Thanks,
-pat
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-04 18:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-04 8:30 [PATCH] pcmcia: get initialization ordering right [Was: [PATCH 2.5] : i82365 & platform_bus_type] mika.penttila
2003-03-04 9:54 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-03-04 14:35 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-03-04 17:16 ` Jean Tourrilhes
2003-03-04 17:48 ` Patrick Mochel [this message]
2003-03-04 18:54 ` Jean Tourrilhes
2003-03-04 19:47 ` Dominik Brodowski
2003-03-05 6:39 ` [PATCH] driver model: fix platform_match [Was: Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: get initialization ordering right [Was: [PATCH 2.5] : i82365 & platform_bus_type]] Dominik Brodowski
2003-03-05 16:16 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-03-15 2:03 ` Jean Tourrilhes
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-04 1:30 [PATCH 2.5] : i82365 & platform_bus_type Jean Tourrilhes
2003-03-04 7:39 ` [PATCH] pcmcia: get initialization ordering right [Was: [PATCH 2.5] : i82365 & platform_bus_type] Dominik Brodowski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.33.0303041123210.992-100000@localhost.localdomain \
--to=mochel@osdl.org \
--cc=jt@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@brodo.de \
--cc=mika.penttila@kolumbus.fi \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).