Re: arm-lh7a40x IDE support in 2.6.6

[Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl>]

On Friday 14 of May 2004 21:52, Russell King wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 08:45:51PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On Friday 14 of May 2004 19:26, Marc Singer wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 06:40:04PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > > I was just porting my patches killing <asm/arch/ide.h> for
> > > > ARM to 2.6.6 when noticed that more work is needed now. :-(
> > > >
> > > > arch/arm/mach-lh7a40x/ide-lpd7a40x.c
> > > > include/asm-arm/arch-lh7a40x/ide.h
> > > >
> > > > Why it couldn't be done in drivers/ide/arm
> > > > (as discussed on linux-ide)?
> > >
> > > Your response took look enough for me to switch to another job.  I
> > > haven't yet returned to dealing with this.
> >
> > Yes, it took too long.
> >
> > Anyway, pushing non-working code to mainline is a bad thing
> > (I can show some proofs for this statement).
>
> It was a necessary step.  To get around this, we're going to ask people
> to submit new machine support on a file by file basis, and that's just
> not practical, and you can't expect me to be able to track _every_
> _single_ fscking change to the kernel, and pick up every one in a
> review.

Nobody expects this but expecting people to try building they patches
against latest & greatest kernel before pushing to Linus is sane & practical.
-> ask people to submit patches which are buildable.

> There will always be a delay between changes happening between two people
> and we have to live with it.  Not everyone works on Linus' latest kernel.