From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] scsi fixes for 2.6.25-rc2 Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:25:24 -0500 Message-ID: <47C08134.2030205@garzik.org> References: <1203779614.3139.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:35975 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754677AbYBWUZ2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:25:28 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1203779614.3139.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley , Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-scsi , linux-kernel James Bottomley wrote: > This is the latest crop of bug fixes plus one new driver: mvsas. We're [...] > Jeff Garzik (1): > mvsas: Add Marvell 6440 SAS/SATA driver [...] > Ke Wei (1): > mvsas: convert from rough draft to working driver I know I am probably shooting myself in the foot here, since I am the original author of mvsas, but... Should we be adding new drivers during -rc? On one hand, it's clear the addition does not break anything, and adds value for users. On the other hand, it's clearly not a bug fix, and -rc could easily get bloated with new drivers that didn't make the merge window. On the net driver side of things, I have a few new net drivers that I have queued for 2.6.26, because they did not make the merge window. This is inconsistent with your apparently policy. I would just prefer to have a clear and consistent policy here, regarding new drivers during -rc. Thanks, Jeff