On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 03:08:00PM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > * Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> [091008 15:20]: >> >> <snip/> >> >> >> > Here you can see Uwe Kleine-K??nig sending the original patch without >> >> > even CC'ing the mmc list: >> >> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=124820861213849&w=2 >> >> > >> >> > And it was unintentionally broken by this one: >> >> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-mmc&m=125249763422227&w=2 >> >> >> >> Er, actually that one was ok, the problem was introduced only in the >> >> final version: >> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-mmc&m=125366315417006&w=2 >> > >> > Right, looks like Roger forgot to Cc linux-mmc. >> > >> >> > I don't see what we are waiting for, the code is clearly broken, even >> >> > the compiler warns that nobody is using omap_hsmmc_probe(). >> > >> > I've sent Roger's patch to Andrew & linux-mmc so hopefully it will get >> > merged soon: >> > >> > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg00539.html >> >> I don't see what's specific about mmc in that patch, nor omap. It's >> just a fix for an obvious mistake that must be picked ASAP and can't >> possibly be NAK'ed. >> >> There's a tree for trivial fixes: >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jikos/trivial >> >> And one for includecheck: >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaswinder/linux-2.6 >> >> What's the procedure for obvious fixes? I'm CC'ing Greg KH and Andrew >> Morton because I think they might interested in fixing these kinds of >> issues quickly in the future. > > What kind of issues? Why would I be interested, where is the problem? The obvious-brain-dead-duh kind of issues, like this one. The problem is that OMAP devices (like beagleboard) are not booting correctly right now because of a wrong merge. It has been identified, tested, and acked, but nobody has picked it up for a pull request, so it's not clear it will be on -rc4. To me it's not clear who should push the patch, it seems it doesn't belong on linux-omap, so Tony is pushing it through linux-mmc, which I don't think is the right place. They should be handling mmc-related issues, not obvious breakage. In order to keep the engines oiled I think there must be a process to flag obvious generic breakage so it's immediately picked; maybe an 'obvious-fixes' tree, or a 'simple-fixes' that has 'trivial', 'includecheck', and similar, or maybe nothing needs to be done. Up to you to decide. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
