On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:18:24AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 09:59:38AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > Please trim your replies. > > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 01:53:49PM +0300, Dmitry Kasatkin wrote: > > > >>> That change seems to cause the problems: > > > >>> > > > >>> commit 0730d52a86919300a39a2be37f6c140997dfb82f > > > >>> "xhci:prevent "callbacks suppressed" when debug is not enabled" > > > >>> > > > >>> - Sedat - > > > >>> > > > >>> [1] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/usb.git/commit/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ring.c?h=usb-next&id=0730d52a86919300a39a2be37f6c140997dfb82f > > > >>> > > > >> Hello, > > > >> > > > >> [PATCHv2 1/2] was not applied before. > > > >> I pointed this out few hours ago... > > > > So commit 0730d52a86919300a39a2be37f6c140997dfb82f 'xhci:prevent > > "callbacks suppressed" when debug is not enabled' needed to be applied > > after your first patch? And basically applying that patch alone breaks > > the build? > > > > Ugh. Sorry about this. Greg, how do you want to handle this? > > See my other response about your pull request, how about tacking it onto > there? Yeah, you could take the first patch and apply it to the usb-next tree. There would still be a few patches where build breakage occurs, but that will be there regardless of whether we revert that patch, apply the first one, and then re-apply the second one. So just applying the first patch seems to be the better option. Sarah Sharp -- 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
