From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 988D5C433EF for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 17:35:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231468AbiF2Rf6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2022 13:35:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44702 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231195AbiF2Rfw (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2022 13:35:52 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77F813B294; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 56BBA68AA6; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:35:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:35:45 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Christoph Hellwig , Arve =?iso-8859-1?B?SGr4bm5lduVn?= , Todd Kjos , Martijn Coenen , Joel Fernandes , Christian Brauner , Hridya Valsaraju , Suren Baghdasaryan , Theodore Ts'o , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , "Alex Xu (Hello71)" , Paolo Abeni , Rob Herring , "Paul E. McKenney" , Frederic Weisbecker , Neeraj Upadhyay , Josh Triplett , Steven Rostedt , Mathieu Desnoyers , Lai Jiangshan , Shuah Khan , LKML , WireGuard mailing list , Netdev , rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove CONFIG_ANDROID Message-ID: <20220629173545.GA26648@lst.de> References: <20220629161527.GA24978@lst.de> <20220629163007.GA25279@lst.de> <20220629164543.GA25672@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:30:35PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Properly resolved by whom? It sounds like you're up for intentionally > allowing a userspace regression, and also volunteering other people's > time into fixing that regression? The way I understand the kernel > development process is that the person proposing a change is responsible > for not intentionally causing regressions, and if one is pointed out, a > v+1 of that patch is provided that doesn't cause the regression. If you think the code does not work when the system frequently suspends and resumes, then well it is broken already, as that can happen just as much on non-Android systems. So maybe we should just remove it if it is so broken that you fear about regressions on the 3 and a half Android systems in the world running an upstream kernel?