Le 13/05/2011 18:20, Greg KH : > On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 05:03:02PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: >> on 9g20 they are the same as the 9260 >> >> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Resent upon Greg's request. >> Based on current linux-next. >> Applies cleanly on current linus' tree (2.6.39-rc7+) >> >> BTW, can we imagine it going to mainline before .39-final in a "fixes" pull >> request to Linus from a at91 tree? > > No, as I don't think this is a bug-fix-only-for-regression, is it? Not a regression, but a oh-my-god-how-it-has-been-there-for-such-a-long-time type of bug. > It looks to be a "fix for new hardware" type thing, right? Hardware has been merged in kernel for a pretty long time now... But anyway, I fully understand: this bug has been sitting in the dark for a handful of kernel revision now, so it can wait for .40... > And is this really the correct way to do this for the .40 kernel, which > is where I would be queueing this up for? Right. Let's queue it for .40. Bye, -- Nicolas Ferre -- 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
