Oliver Endriss wrote: > Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >>>>> If we should go back to 2.6.23 level, so far nobody seems to have >>>>> realized a improvement for the LifeView Trio stuff, I'm not against it. >>>>> >>>>> The changeset in question to revert is mercurial 6579. >>>>> >>>>> If nobody else is interested and no comments, I also don't care anymore. >>>>> >>>> (Basically I don't care because I am tired of discussing kernel >>>> politics.) >>>> >>>> Imho a fix should be applied, no matter how many lines it has. >>>> If that is not possible the offending patch should be reverted in >>>> 2.6.24.x. >>>> >> ... >> >> Let me try to reset to a sane state. >> >> With the current tree (changesets 6579 and 7186), is there any broken board? If >> so, what board(s)? >> >> Both patches are already applied at mainstream and should be available on >> 2.6.25. Are those OK for 2.6.25? >> >> Is there any missing patch that should be sent to -stable (2.6.24)? If so, what >> patch? >> > > The point is that 6579 was applied to 2.6.24.x, but 7186 wasn't. > So TTS_1401 support is broken for the 2.6.24 series. > > Imho 7186 _must_ be applied to 2.6.24, no matter how large the patch is. > Are you saying that THIS is the patch that needs to be applied to 2.6.24.y ? http://linuxtv.org/hg/v4l-dvb/rev/eb6bc7f18024 If so, this patch seems fine for -stable. We just have to make sure it applies correctly, etc. -Mike _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
