From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S935295AbXG0UXN@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S935295AbXG0UXN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:23:13 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S934279AbXG0UW5
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:22:57 -0400
Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:60975 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S934430AbXG0UW5 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:22:57 -0400
Message-ID: <46AA53E3.5080501@garzik.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:21:55 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070719)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>, Adam Belay <ambx1@neo.rr.com>,
       Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
       =?ISO-8859-15?Q?S=E9bastien_Dugu=E9?= <sebastien.dugue@bull.net>,
       Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
       linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86, serial: always probe for legacy COM ports
References: <200707271158.50028.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> <46AA33FF.4070504@garzik.org> <200707271411.42253.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
In-Reply-To: <200707271411.42253.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----)
X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.9 on srv5.dvmed.net summary:
	Content analysis details:   (-4.3 points, 5.0 required)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Friday 27 July 2007 12:05:51 pm Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> This is still incomplete, as repeatedly stated.  Here is the email, again.

> OK, uncle!  I'll work on your helpful advice (thanks for that), but
> it feels too risky for this stage of 2.6.23.  Maybe I can come up with
> something for a future release.

The changeset in the kernel is too risky _without_ the changes I described.

Hence the repeated use of the word "incomplete."

* The patch has transition issues, when you shuffle users from one 
device driver to another.  Existing change should not be deployed 
without ensuring breakage is unlikely.

* The new driver is missing module unload support.  Existing change 
should not be deployed without this.

* DOCUMENT the user visible changes.  Existing change should not be 
deployed without this.

	Jeff