Re: [stable] Re: [02/07] [SCSI] qla2xxx: Pull-down scsi-host-addition to follow board initialization.

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 03:20:37PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Chris, all,
> > 
> > > -stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us
> > > know.
> > 
> > I have. This one patch is rather big and parts of it don't seem to
> > belong to -stable. Can't it be simplified? More below.
> 
> The threshold for "what belongs in -stable" is a) set too high and b)
> over-zealously enforced.

Hm, are there patches that have been submitted to stable@ that have been
rejected for "over-zealous" enforcement?  I can't think of any ones
recently.

> > > Return to previous held-logic of calling scsi_add_host() only
> > > after the board has been completely initialized.
> > 
> > What real bug is it supposed to fix? (I guess some, but this leading
> > comment should give the datails.)
> 
> If that's what was in the patch which went into 2.6.13 then we should be OK
> with a full backport.  If the person who originally raised that patch put
> unrelated things into a single patch then that's where the problem started.
> 
> Bear in mind that there is also risk in only part-applying a patch.

I agree.  That's why I don't have a problem with this patch, it's better
to stay inline with upstream (meaning 2.6.12-git) than diverging.  Makes
my life easier when I try to figure out if stuff needs to be merged to
Linus :)

thanks,

greg k-h