From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750830AbWFEJQR (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 05:16:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750837AbWFEJQR (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 05:16:17 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:36077 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750830AbWFEJQQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 05:16:16 -0400 Subject: Re: merging new drivers (was Re: 2.6.18 -mm merge plans) From: Arjan van de Ven To: Andrew Morton Cc: Christoph Hellwig , jeff@garzik.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060605021054.4d5428da.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20060604135011.decdc7c9.akpm@osdl.org> <20060605013223.GD17361@havoc.gtf.org> <20060604184711.0a328d18.akpm@osdl.org> <20060605085918.GB26766@infradead.org> <20060605021054.4d5428da.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 11:16:09 +0200 Message-Id: <1149498969.3111.35.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 02:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:59:18 +0100 > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 06:47:11PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > Yes, I agree. As long as we reasonably think that a piece of code *will* > > > become acceptable within a reasonable amount of time then going early is > > > safe. > > > > > > Definitly not the case for areca. The only progress at all is where people > > like Arjan, Randy or me did very intensive babysitting. And it's still far > > from beeing there. > > > > And especially in scsi land I'm absolutely against putting in more substandard > > drivers. The subsystem is still badly plagued from lots of old drivers that > > aren't up to any standards, and we need to decrease the maintaince load due > > to odd drivers not increase it even further. > > So.. How are we going to get the Areca controllers supported in Linux? > The code's been sitting in -mm for over a year and the vendor does have > staff assigned to work on it. the driver is improving for sure. What seems to work well is when we make a work-to-do list, the vendor then goes about and fixes most of that quite quickly. I think I'm approaching the end of useful review input I can give (they fixed most if not all the stuff I flagged before), it would be really nice if Christoph or some other scsi person would do a review again and make a list of "these should be fixed and then we can merge" (and a list of "these can be fixed post merge" as well)