[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121115210748.GB3358@joana>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 19:07:48 -0200
From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, ulisses@...fusion.mobi,
marcel@...tmann.org,
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...nbossa.org>
Subject: Re: [ 01/82] Bluetooth: Always compile SCO and L2CAP in Bluetooth
Core
Hi Ben,
* Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk> [2012-11-15 20:04:32 +0000]:
> On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 21:38 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 04:30:44PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>
> > > Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:24:26 -0200
> > >
> > > > Hi Ben,
> > > >
> > > > * Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk> [2012-11-14 05:39:34 +0000]:
> > > >
> > > >> 3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> > > >>
> > > >> ------------------
> > > >>
> > > >> From: Ulisses Furquim <ulisses@...fusion.mobi>
> > > >>
> > > >> commit f1e91e1640d808d332498a6b09b2bcd01462eff9 upstream.
> > > >>
> > > >> The handling of SCO audio links and the L2CAP protocol are essential to
> > > >> any system with Bluetooth thus are always compiled in from now on.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder if this could not break any kind of script or code people have that
> > > > refer directly to the sco and l2cap modules. Also I don't see this change as
> > > > really necessary for 3.2.
> > >
> > > Agreed, I wish this had not been merged into -stable, I would have never
> > > submitted a patch like this myself.
> >
> > This is required by:
> >
> > commit ff03261adc8b4bdd8291f1783c079b53a892b429
> > Author: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...nbossa.org>
> > Date: Thu Aug 23 21:32:44 2012 -0300
> >
> > Bluetooth: Fix sending a HCI Authorization Request over LE links
> >
> > commit d8343f125710fb596f7a88cd756679f14f4e77b9 upstream.
> >
> > which was already applied.
>
> So, do you think it's better to revert that in 3.2, or to go ahead with
> this?
I suggest you to revert it. There is a much simpler solution if revert, fix
the patch and apply it again. No need to push this module merge patch here.
The problem seems to be only a missing EXPORT_SYMBOL of the smp.c method. That
should fix it. If you want me to fix that just ask me.
Gustavo
--
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