On Thu, 24 Jan 2013, Lan Tianyu wrote: > > > + status = usb_disable_function_remotewakeup(udev); > > > > Don't call that function here. Just put the code here and run it > > directly. Then you can get rid of the old function. > > > usb_disable_function_remotewakeup���� is just introduced at last patch to > resolve too more indentation. > So it's ok to remove it so quickly ? Or I should merge these two patches? I thought the purpose of patch 1/2 was to have something that could be applied to the -stable kernels. Isn't that what Sarah asked for? A short fix, followed by another patch that would clean up the mess. Alan Stern -- 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
