On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 05:07:12AM -0700, C.Y.M wrote: > I was just starting to compare the changes in 2.6.12-rc4 with the latest > dvb-kernel from cvs and noticed a difference in saa7146_fops.c which I am unsure > about. It appears the kernel sources are using > "assert_spin_locked(&dev->slock);" instead of > "BUG_ON(!spin_is_locked(&dev->slock));". Is this something we want to > incorporate in cvs? There are also many other changes in the rest of the sources > (for example, ttpci) that do not to appear to have been checked into dvb-kernel > cvs but directly into the linux kernel. Its difficult to keep track when code > is changed in the linux kernel sources but there is no changelog. I have > rebuilt my patches to support backwards compatibility for 2.6.11 and 2.6.12+. > Please consider checking in these changes and then we can go through the rest of > the differences in 2.6.12-rc4. Thanks.. ... > +#if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE > KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,11)) > + ret = usb_bulk_msg(cinergyt2->udev, usb_sndbulkpipe(cinergyt2->udev, 1), > + send_buf, send_buf_len, &actual_len, 1000); > +#else > ret = usb_bulk_msg(cinergyt2->udev, usb_sndbulkpipe(cinergyt2->udev, 1), > send_buf, send_buf_len, &actual_len, HZ); > +#endif I'm currently generating a new DVB patchset against 2.6.12-rc4. Although I recognize that these version dependencies would make life easier for people who want to use CVS with older kernels, they would make my job more diffcult, as I cannot submit code with them upstream. So I don't want to commit your patch. My plan is that starting with 2.6.12 I will put patchsets in the download area that work with the latest stable kernel, while CVS will work with the latest -rc. For now you'll just have to keep your patch around seperately. Johannes
