Re: [GIT PULL] xhci: Big-endian sparse fixes.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 10:40:48AM -0800, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 03:49:43PM -0800, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 03:36:56PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 03:36:02PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 03:14:40PM -0800, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > > > > The following changes since commit 7d49f0bac41ee9b012af1efe2f725d91a87a8fe9:
> > > > > 
> > > > >   USB: Maintainers change for usb serial drivers (2013-10-31 08:53:52 -0700)
> > > > > 
> > > > > are available in the git repository at:
> > > > > 
> > > > >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sarah/xhci.git tags/for-usb-linus-2013-11-27
> > > > > 
> > > > > for you to fetch changes up to 172a894f74e090f3aada7b0347d334ad9db14a36:
> > > > > 
> > > > >   xhci: fix incorrect type in assignment in xhci_address_device() (2013-11-18 10:10:13 -0800)
> > > > > 
> > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > xhci: Big-endian sparse fixes.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Greg,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Here's five sparse cleanups that make the xHCI driver actually work on
> > > > > big-endian machines.  They're all marked for stable.
> > > > 
> > > > Why is a new feature like big-endian support for xhci a stable thing?
> > 
> > It's not a new feature.  The xHCI driver has supported big-endian
> > systems for ages (since 3.0 I think).  There were several xHCI
> > structures that had variables marked with __le32 to make sure the driver
> > continued to work on big-endian systems.  However, I was lax, and code
> > got into 3.4 and 3.12 that broke the driver under big endian systems.
> > Sparse found those issues, and Xenia cleaned them up.
> > 
> > > > And something that isn't ok for 3.13-final?
> > > 
> > > Wait, sorry, this is for 3.13-final?
> > 
> > These are fixes to be queued for 3.13.
> > 
> > > totally confused.
> > > 
> > > And if it is, is this a regression?  It looks like a new feature to me.
> > 
> > Yes, it's a regression that has been there since 3.4.  No one complained
> > about it since then, so I seriously considered whether they should go
> > into stable or not.
> > 
> > Does that explanation make sense?
> 
> Bah, this is not worth arguing about.  I have a more important
> regression to fix to get into 3.13, so I'll send you a second pull
> request with all these patches queued for usb-next.

Ok, consider this one dropped.

greg k-h
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Media]     [Linux Input]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Old Linux USB Devel Archive]

  Powered by Linux