Re: [RFC][PATCH 8/9] 3c59x driver conversion
From: Jeff Garzik <hidden>
Date: 2006-08-13 19:53:58
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
From: Jeff Garzik <hidden>
Date: 2006-08-13 19:53:58
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
Daniel Phillips wrote:
That is why it has not yet been submitted upstream. Respectfully, I do not think that jgarzik has yet put in the work to know if this anti deadlock technique is reasonable or not, and he was only commenting on some superficial blemish. I still don't get his point, if there was one. He seems to be arguing in favor of a jump-off-the-cliff approach to driver conversion. If he wants to do the work and take the blame when some driver inevitably breaks because of being edited in a hurry then he is welcome to submit the necessary additional patches. Until then, there are about 3 nics that actually matter to network storage at the moment, all of them GigE.
Quite whining and blaming the reviewer for a poor approach. A "this driver is sane, VM-wise" flag is just plain stupid, and clearly fragments drivers. In Linux, "temporary flags"... aren't. Jeff