| From: |
| Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> |
| To: |
| Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> |
| Subject: |
| [ofa-general] Merging of completely unreviewed drivers |
| Date: |
| Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:01:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID: |
| <20080221210124.GD28328@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> |
| Cc: |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@kroah.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
general@lists.openfabrics.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Glenn Streiff <gstreiff@NetEffect.com>, Faisal Latif <flatif@NetEffect.com> |
| Archive‑link: | |
Article |
[ Linus Added to the To: since I want to hear his opinion on this issue. ]
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:28:55PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > This driver should really have gotten some review before being included
> > in the kernel.
>
> > Even a simple checkpatch run finds more than > 250 stylistic errors
> > (not code bugs but cases where the driver violates the standard code
> > formatting rules of kernel code).
>
> Linus has strongly stated that we should merge hardware drivers early,
> and I agree: although the nes driver clearly needs more work, there's
> no advantage to users with the hardware in forcing them to wait for
> 2.6.26 to merge the driver, since they'll just have to patch the
> grungy code in themselves anyway. And by merging the driver early, we
> get fixed up for any tree-wide changes and allow janitors to help with
> the cleanup.
Is it really intended to merge drivers without _any_ kind of review?
This driver even lacks a basic "please fix the > 250 checkpatch errors" [1]
and similar low hanging fruits that could easily be spotted and then
fixed by the submitter within a short amount of time.
I see the point that it might make sense to not prevent the merging of
drivers infinitely when they have some hard-to-fix issues, but was this
really meant as an excuse for maintainers to no longer any review of
what they merge at all?
> (By the way, the code is not that pretty but it a lot closer to
> upstream style than most driver submissions)
>...
There might be worse code being submitted, but when looking at what gets
merged into Linus' tree this driver beats all other drivers I remember
in both number of stylistic problems and bugs. [2]
> - R.
cu
Adrian
BTW: Greg, you are Cc'ed for your joke in [3]...
[1] not to mention the > 2000 checkpatch warnings
[2] as already said, that's not meant against the driver submitter
I'm complaining about the complete lack of review that would have
brought this driver into shape
[3] http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/12/427
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
