On Sat, 2013-07-13 at 10:09 -0700, Greg KH wrote:

On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 09:08:01AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:

...

quoted

I was looking at it as a quirk:

" - New device IDs and quirks are also accepted."

I even considered implementation as a pci quirk. I didn't because the
PHY work needed to happen too late during probe. The frustrating thing
is there is probably 15 lines of code that are needed to get it to
work, all the rest is infrastructure to make it generic.

163 lines of code is not a "quirk" I can accept.  When I wrote, "new
device ids or quirks can be accpted for stable", I meant things like
commit 9e9dd0e889c76c786e8f2e164c825c3c06dea30c.  That's acceptable.
Not thing huge thing.

Got it. I was confused on "new device IDs and quirks" versus "support
for new hardware". My fault, that's clear now. 

...

quoted

I get the size argument. It's too big. The docs say 100 lines with
context, I've seen much larger go in... I just wasn't sure where the
line is. It seems things are getting more strict here, not less. OK.
Lesson learned.

You have seen larger "quirks" than this go into the stable tree?
Examples for where I've been sleeping on the job would be good.

No, sorry, I just meant patches larger than 100 lines with context,
that's all.

...

quoted

quoted

This isn't going to land in Linus's tree until 3.12 anyway, so what's
the rush?

My reasoning is that the BSP for this is based on 3.8. I would like to
bring 3.8 in sync with master for support of this board so I can update
the release BSP to use the same sources. People can use my code from
the linux-yocto_3.8 standard/minnow branch, but it would be preferable
if that code was also destined for upstream.

That's your choice to pick 3.8, not upstream's (and frankly, not
something that I would have picked, but that's another topic...)

Maybe we can catch up at LPC or something, I'd like to hear your
thoughts on that. Of course there are a lot of factors that go into
that decision, and the bulk of it is consolidating effort on a single
tree across BSPs in a project that has a 6 month release cadence.

...

You are adding functionality for new devices that take much more than a
simple "add an id to a table", so no, it's not ok for stable releases.

Got it, I'll drop the stable lines from the subsequent versions and
keep that in mind for future projects. I'm trying to think if I can
polish up the docs to help clarify things, thinking on it.

Thank you Greg.

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel