On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:15:11AM -0400, Bill Pemberton wrote: > Jiri Slaby writes: > > > > On 03/20/2013 03:42 PM, Bill Pemberton wrote: > > > Ok, for the unopened ports there *should* never be any actual data to > > > push so the push is really doing nothing anyhow in these cases. It's > > > coming from the device sending an initial change port command. > > > > > > Anyhow, so my patch adding more is_open logic can be dropped and then > > > yours will apply fine. What's the best way for me to handle this? > > > Send a revert for my patch so yours will apply or send an updated > > > version of your patch that removes my additions? > > > > Asking Greg to revert should suffice. I commented on that patch, but in > > a different thread, so Greg missed the comment the patch is not needed > > IIRC. What was the title of the patch, I cannot find it immediately :/? > > > > "USB: quatech2: only write to the tty if the port is open." (commit > 27b351c in v3.9-rc3). I've now reverted this, so it should be ok. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
