Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Sun, 2013-07-14 at 18:40 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Not before it's been in the distro, no. Something like a PCI change
> *definitely* should never be marked for stable, unless it causes
> crashes or is a _new_ regression that causes dead machines.
> 
> Because the likelihood that that 4-5 line "obvious" change breaks
> things is pretty high. It needs testing elsewhere - on the machines
> that weren't broken - in a big way first.
> 
> And don't bother talking about "obvious fix". Especially not when it
> comes to the PCI code.

PCI resource allocation code for sure. A bug specific to the hotplug
code path not so ... (for example, a too short reset delay or shit like
that). I agree with you overall but there's still a judgement call
happening at some point I assume and we get at least *some* flexibility
as maintainers as to what we want going there or not right ? :-)

Cheers,
Ben.


--
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/