From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [git pull] IDE fixes Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 16:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <200906071444.33047.bzolnier@gmail.com> <200906072125.40784.bzolnier@gmail.com> <200906080147.12274.bzolnier@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200906080147.12274.bzolnier@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Pekka Enberg , James Bottomley , Alan Cox , Andrew Morton , Stephen Rothwell , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 8 Jun 2009, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > This is not a new feature and basing your opinions on opinions of people > who don't read the code before commenting is bad, really bad, m'kay? The thing is, I had planned on doing a final release yesterday, even before your pull came in. I decided to hold off, let it be, just to test the _current_ state a bit more. No way am I then adding some effectively totally untested new code-path. And if you start messing in partitions.c and adding whole new callback functions to generic block_device_operations, then that's a new code-path. The IDE subsystem has _no_ business adding random new callbacks in the very last days of a release. It sure as hell is not just a bugfix, it's a new feature. The feature may be _needed_ for some specific bug report, but that is totally irrelevant. We don't do things like that. It's also almost certainly not a regression, is it? So by no measure does it work as a "late in the -rc sequence" patch. Linus