[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090728163420.GB14899@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:34:20 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ttydev tree with the
usb.current tree
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 09:32:22AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 02:17:40PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 22:35:04 +1000
> > Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Alan,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:29:11 +0100 Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I need to look at the actual diff, but the combination looks completely
> > > > bogus unless I'm misreading the fixup which is possible.
> > >
> > > Below is the actual patch from the usb.current tree.
> >
> > Thanks - ok that is probably safe. The change I was worried about (the
> > error paths not adjusting port->count are ok as it gets zeroed within the
> > mutex)
> >
> > Not sure its safe versus hangup but neither was the old code 8)
> >
> > Oliver: I'll send you an alternative patch later today/tomorrow that uses
> > the ASYNC flags.
>
> Should I just drop Oliver's existing patch from my tree for now then?
Ok, in order to get a good merge for today, I've dropped it now.
Oliver, care to work with Alan to get something that is agreeable to
everyone?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists