Re: [PATCH 2/2] suspend: Cleanup calling of power off methods.
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed Sep 21 2005 - 13:03:29 EST
ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> > On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> I think you are not following the proper procedure. All the patches
> >> should go through akpm.
> Ok. I thought it was fine to send simple and obviously correct bug
> fixes to Linus.
I habitually scoop up patches and will get them into Linus (preferably
after 1-2 -mm cycles) if he ducks them.
> > One issue is that I actually worry that Andrew will at some point be where
> > I was a couple of years ago - overworked and stressed out by just tons and
> > tons of patches.
> > Yes, he's written/modified tons of patch-tracking tools, and the git
> > merging hopefully avoids some of the pressures, but it still worries me.
> > If Andrew burns out, we'll all suffer hugely.
> > I'm wondering what we can do to offset those kinds of issues. I _do_ like
> > having -mm as a staging area and catching some problems there, so going
> > through andrew is wonderful in that sense, but it has downsides.
> It is especially challenging for people like me who typically work on
> parts of the kernel without a maintainer. So there frequently isn't
> an intermediate I can submit my patches to.
Yup. And MAINTAINERS has quite a few omissions. I generally know who
should be poked and if there's nobody obvious I have 26000 patches to grep
through to find out who might know a bit about that code. Low-level x86 is
a bit of a problem really because it has many cooks and no obvious chef.
Individual maintainers have differing response times, differing
attentiveness and differing patchloss ratios.
There's also confusion once I've cc'ed a maintainer on a patch over whether
I'll be sending it to Linus or whether I want them to.
If a maintainer has a tree in -mm then I'll autodrop the patch if they
merge it, so there's no confusion there.
If the maintainer says "thanks, merged" and I don't have their tree in -mm
then I'll tend to hang onto the patch indefinitely until it finally hits
-linus. Or I'll eventually forget and merge it up anyway ;)
If the maintainer just acks the patch I'll send it in to Linus.
If the maintainer nacks the patch I'll either drop it or I'll mark it
not-for-merging and hang onto it anwyay, as a reminder that we have some
bug which needs fixing.
If the maintainer has a tree in -mm and doesn't merge the patch I'll hang
onto it and periodically resend to the maintainer until some definite
response comes back.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/