Hi. On 25/05/10 05:02, Pavel Machek wrote: > >>>> - We're dealing with the symptom, not the cause. Almost always a bad idea. >>> >>> I very much prefer to have a fix for a symptom than no fix at all, which is the >>> realistic alternative in this case. >>> >>> So, I think we should merge the patch and if someone finds the root cause >>> at one point in future, then we can just use the *right* approach instead of >>> the present one. >>> >>> The problem is real and people in the field are affected by it, so if you don't >>> have a working alternative patch, please just let go. >> >> I'm not denying that the problem is real. What I am concerned about >> is finding a real solution, not just putting a sticky plaster over >> the wound. It seems to me to be much wiser to deal with the issue >> properly now instead of doing extra work later to diagnose what >> might be a harder to reproduce symptom of the same problem. I'd >> happily put the time in now myself, but I simply don't have the time >> this week. >> >> Would it be possible to apply the patch, adding some sort of new tag >> that can be used to say "This needs further attention", perhaps >> including an enduring reference to this conversation. Later, the >> 'real' fix could include another special tag that says "Proper fix >> for the symptom addressed in commit 5e94f810"? > > WARN_ON() whenever patch triggers? I suppose that would do. I was thinking of a more generic git tag that could perhaps be searched for later, but .. okay. Nigel _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
