Hi,
On 01/03/2014 11:00 PM, Sarah Sharp wrote:
On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 09:56:45AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 01/03/2014 01:45 AM, Sarah Sharp wrote:
Ok, Alan's additional patch fixed the warnings I was seeing on UAS
device unplug. James, can you Cc me on the finished patch when you send
it in?
Hans, I don't want to send the UAS patches off to Greg until James'
patches get into mainline. I believe Greg's usb-next tree is frozen at
this point, so they'll have to wait until 3.15.
Ugh, I must say I'm rather unhappy about this, waiting till 3.14 to give
time to shake things out was fine. But since the start of the 3.13 cycle,
there have been no issues found in the xhci / uas code.
I completely understand why you're unhappy. I agree that the pull
request you sent me on Nov 18th is fine (aside from not being a GPG
signed git tag). [1] I also agree that the UAS and xHCI driver changes
have been stable during my testing, other than triggering the SCSI oops
on UAS disconnect.
Yes it triggered an existing problem in another subsys, but the code itself
has been issue free all this time. If Greg's tree is indeed already frozen I
would rather have us asking an exception for this.
Detach yourself emotionally from your code and look at this request from
a maintainer's perspective.
You're asking me to push 69 patches to Greg after -rc6 is out, for a
driver that's been marked broken for several kernel releases (uas). The
patches enable a feature that's been basically untested across all xHCI
host controllers (streams), and they add new userspace API for usbfs to>
expose streams.
Yes 69 patches which have been ready since November 18. Your argument is
that they were not in linux-next before now, my unhappiness comes from
that they could have been in linux-next for some time now already.
In the meantime, there's a big push to get code into linux-next at least
a week or two before the merge window opens. I sent my last pull request
on Dec 20th, and Felipe closed his USB gadget tree on Dec 26th. I had
hoped to get the SCSI issue settled so I could send in the UAS patches
on the 20th, but that didn't happen. My tree is closed.
These fixes should get merged (and will!), but I will not ask Greg for
an exception to get these patches into 3.14.
Alternatively we could add all of it to 3.14 except for the patch removing
the BROKEN marking from uas. Or at least all the non uas bits, which are
useful to have by themselves.
I think the best way to proceed with this is for me to queue all the
xHCI patches in that pull request for usb-next once 3.14-rc1 is out, and
then you send a separate pull request to Greg. You're going to need to
be able to send him pull requests with a signed git tag in the future
anyway.
Since you have all the patches in your tree now anyways I believe it would
be best if you just send a pull-req for all of them. I see little value
in me sending a separate pull-req for the uas patches. As discussed before
I'm fine with picking up uas maintenance from then on.
Regards,
Hans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
