On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 22:28:18 -0600 (CST) > Mike Isely <isely@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Mike Isely wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > > > > > There were an upstream change usb_lock_device_for_reset() that touched on > > > > pvrusb2 driver. I didn't backport it yet, since I'm not sure if the change is > > > > ok. Could you please check? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mauro. > > > > > > Yes, the pvrusb2 part of this change looks fine (just change the > > > treatment of the return code). > > > > Before I cause any confusion, the above sentence has a critical typo. > > I was just pointing out that the pvrusb2 change in the patch below only > > adjusts the treatment of the return code, which makes perfect sense > > given the upstream change. I wasn't asking you to change anything :-) > > The change is fine. > > Ok. The backport of this patch would be something interesting... > > It will be something like this: > > #if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,29) > if (ret == 0) > #else > if (ret == 1) > #endif > Yeah, I know. It's part of the fun of staying in sync with multiple kernels and their ever-changing internal interfaces. I have to support this in the standalone pvrusb2 driver too. One more task this weekend... -Mike -- Mike Isely isely @ pobox (dot) com PGP: 03 54 43 4D 75 E5 CC 92 71 16 01 E2 B5 F5 C1 E8 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
