On 2015-04-30 11:34, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: >> There seem to be a large move-around here w r t figuring out the active >> port. IIRC, we needed to do it twice (both before and after the FIXATE >> hook) for some corner case reason, but my memory is vague. > > I'm pretty sure you introduced this duplication just in case some module > does something stupid. That is, there was no documented corner case that > would have required the duplication. If you say so. Anyhow, even if don't feel confident myself that this patch set won't cause regressions, I can't point to any particular case where this would happen, so I don't want to block this patch set either. -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
