On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 12:46:22PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > Why did this break things? Hi, I don't know. As upstream is unresponsive and is applying patches to his private repo without submitting them to the list (which I can understand), I decided to submit the particular fix so mainline users can get tethering working again. I received a forwarded email with the patch (I think that's because I submitted the driver to mainline) asking for the mainline driver status and if it was being maintained. > > I'm not applying a fix when nobody can explain the reason why: > > 1) Things broke in the first place > 2) Forcing reservation of 2 bytes fixes things Honestly, I can't answer either of those ones. I just submitted a patch that *seemed* to fix the problem (I don't own an iPhone device since long time ago), after explictly requesting upstream to submit by himself, and getting a negative. > Where is the built in assumption about "2" and why does it exist? Why > can't we fix this code not to have such assumptions in the first > place? Ditto. At this point, I think that David, Diego or Daniel should step in if they want to keep on with this discussion. I won't have problems if you want to take this off-list. Best regards, -- L. Alberto Giménez JabberID agimenez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx GnuPG key ID 0x3BAABDE1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
