From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 12 00:25:56 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9424216A420 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:25:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mozolevsky@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.170]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AFBE13C448 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:25:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mozolevsky@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id y2so766563uge.37 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:25:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=Y2aNvm2XfN/YyDB7iwUdWAkbMONH+E3IqqisWNLgdq8=; b=Ztv1frGxfYKC6Uhe4oTyGw6eawVizr+kDnIgMZ4pYLppKGwfbUIT3lHV/1a/3F3aUS+IopNDkt6HeMJCqubhCCS6FXqkVglxuAeIN82POiHb+VvjP+tgGNCxdeh7PY0UsnMp8epcQCCfgJxVAmVG2XdPX+cONEeA9+a3Gr7N4z4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=hXIOfK/GtAO04toYdfO9rhdeL9IaU7bJydrahdCXPdzvfvY0885RkEdJW3iaaUwiCNYnLx7LhKSNInmwMy4EuYW1BV0JNs4c0zKEvs1S6UHnzDlct67xtkWEaAOkwO1NLIG/CAoO6HOaBP3wP4WBTmGpNDzdZIAtErJnydsDBiU= Received: by 10.66.221.17 with SMTP id t17mr622323ugg.66.1200097554628; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:25:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.248.11 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:25:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:25:54 +0000 From: "Igor Mozolevsky" Sender: mozolevsky@gmail.com To: ticso@cicely.de In-Reply-To: <20080112002305.GE79270@cicely12.cicely.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <478556AD.6090400@bsdforen.de> <20080110003524.GB5188@soaustin.net> <200801111935.50821.peter.schuller@infidyne.com> <20080111211019.GC79270@cicely12.cicely.de> <20080112002305.GE79270@cicely12.cicely.de> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4af78e440ead2d6d Cc: Mark Linimon , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Peter Schuller Subject: Re: Improving the handling of PR:s X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:25:56 -0000 On 12/01/2008, Bernd Walter wrote: > > > Another point about hardware is that a patch might influence other > > > hardware handled by the same driver, which can't be verified by the > > > submitter nor the committer. > > > This is especially true with workarounds, which might only be required > > > for specific chip revisions. > > > > Which can only be verified/fixed once the patch is merged into a > > branch and new PRs are filed, if everyone used the approach of "let's > > not touch it because something might go wrong", nobody would fly > > because they might be involved in a plane-crash (of a similar model of > > a plane, just slightly different configuration)... > > Planes are different to chips - they are documented well. > You can't try and false on patching within the tree. > Errors can happen, but you have at least do the best to avoid bad > effects on hardware which runs fine so far. > > > The procedure would be effectively: > > > > patch->commit->[fixed|PR->limit the scope of the patch->commit]+ > > Hardware doesn't always work this way. > A fix for one HW can break another. Which is why is said *PR->limit the scope of the patch* part! Igor :-/