Samuel Ortiz <sameo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi Kevin, > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 03:06:01PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> Samuel Ortiz <sameo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Hi Felipe, >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 04:28:52PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 03:26:26PM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:12:19PM +0530, Keshava Munegowda wrote: >> >> > > From: Keshava Munegowda <Keshava_mgowda@xxxxxx> >> >> > > >> >> > > Oops are produced during initialization of ehci and ohci >> >> > > drivers. This is because the run time pm apis are used by >> >> > > the driver but the corresponding hwmod structures and >> >> > > initialization is not merged. >> >> > You mean they're currently checked in a different tree ? Is that a >> >> > public one? >> >> >> >> it was supposed to go via linux-omap tree but the patches got lost in >> >> the limbo :-( >> > Then shouldn't those patches be the ones to be sent to Linus as a fix for 3.0 ? >> >> If they were ready, maybe. But those patches still need important work >> (and review) and are not "fix" material but need to wait until the next >> merge window. > Fair enough. > > >> Basically, the original patch should not have been submitted to mainline >> until the runtime PM support was ready, so the correct short term fix is >> to simply revert. >> >> Also, to echo the question from Dima Zavin: >> >> Why isn't this just a simple revert of the original patch? > I did a revert in my tree. Great, that's the cleanest solution IMO. Thanks! Kevin -- 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
