Re: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 support

From: Pavel Machek
Date: Fri Jun 12 2009 - 08:05:41 EST

On Fri 2009-06-12 13:33:21, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 05:00:30AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:49:12 +0100
> >>
> >>> I can not keep up with the number of patches that need to be
> >>> reviewed and ultimately merged. I know this, and I freely admit it,
> >>> and I have done so on many occasions.
> >> Then split up the responsibilities to other people instead of being
> >> the choke point. Controlling everything isn't so important.
> >
> > Don't you think that I've been trying to get other people to be more
> > involved?
> >
> > - I've been pushing people to send patches to the relevent mailing
> > list(s) and maintainer(s) for years.
> >
> > - I've been pushing people to send their ARM patches to the ARM
> > mailing list rather than directly into the patch system for review
> > (it even has a comment telling people this) so that others can get
> > involved in reviewing them, and sharing that work load.
> >
> > Do you think either have been anywhere near successful?
> >
> > For the most part, the answer is no. People concentrate on their own
> > areas, and won't look at someone with a new class of platforms (eg,
> > the STMP or W90x900 stuff).
> >
> > I'd absolutely love it if the review load could be shared, but for the
> > most part it just doesn't happen. Everyone's far too busy with their
> > own stuff to help out (and that's a reason that they'll give if tackled
> > head on about it.)
> Question on this: I occasionally review patches where I have the
> knowledge or interest. Most of the time however, I do not have the
> hardware needed to actually test the patches, and so my reviews are
> simply coding style, etc. I don't want to add my acked-by to something I
> can't test, or am not at reasonably confident is okay (ie haven't
> tested, but know the hardware well enough to be satisfied the patch is
> okay by reading it).
> The problem I see for developers I do reviews for, is that they post a
> patch, I do a code review, the post an update looking for an acked-by,
> and the best I can say is "looks okay to me, but get someone else to ack
> it". Whats the best approach here? Should I just add my Reviewed-by tag,
> or should can/should I ack patches where I think the code is okay, but
> can't test.

I believe you have slightly higher standards than

I believe it is okay to ack a patch when you don't have a hardware;
you can trust original submitter to test it on the hw. As long as the
patch is not broken by design, or contain some gross uglyness...

(cesky, pictures)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at