On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Chase Douglas wrote: > >>>> I'd happuly take Chase's patch, but want to make sure that we don't cause > >>>> any changes that would make backwards compatilibity an issue later. > >>> > >>> There should be no compatibility issues. However, we might be better > >>> off in the long term taking (some variation of) these patches instead. > >> > >> I like the proposed changes, but I want to ensure stable kernel releases > >> aren't left out of the fix for hid-magicmouse. I don't know the best way > >> forward, but here's one possibility: > >> > >> 1. Apply my patch to manually set the buffer size hint > >> 2. It gets sent to stable trees due to the 'Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxx' line > >> 3. Apply Jeffrey's patches, including a reversion of my buffer size hint > >> > >> Obviously the extra application and reversion is odd, but this seems the > >> easiest way forward given that the patches already exist and can be > >> applied without issue. > >> > > > > Or, once Jeffrey's patches hit mainline, send your change to stable with > > the explanation why it is needed for stable but not for mainline. > > One thing that crossed my mind is that Jeffrey's patches wouldn't be > merged until 2.6.40, right? If so, even 2.6.39 will be released with > this bug, which makes me want to go with the plan I outlined above. OK, applied. Thanks everybody. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
