On 10/06/2024 16:02, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 9:24 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 10/06/2024 15:17, Lk Sii wrote: >>>>>>> Why Zijun cannot provide answer on which kernel was it tested? Why the >>>>>>> hardware cannot be mentioned? >>>>>>> >>>>>> i believe zijun never perform any tests for these two issues as >>>>>> explained above. >>>>> >>>>> yeah, and that was worrying me. >>>>> >>>> Only RB5 has QCA6390 *embedded* among DTS of mainline kernel, but we >>>> can't have a RB5 to test. >>>> >>>> Don't worry about due to below points: >>>> 1) Reporter have tested it with her machine >>>> 2) issue B and relevant fix is obvious after discussion. >>>> >>> I believe we have had too much discussion for this simple change. >>> @Krzysztof >>> do you have any other concerns? >> >> No, nothing from me. > > Ok, but I guess since you didn't sign off that means you are still > unconvinced that this should be applied? I could try pushing it to > bluetooth-next to check if it blows up on the next merge window, but > it is not that nice to have things completely untested, as far > upstream goes, being pushed that way. The patch is fixing at least one case, so at least one group of users would be happy with it. Best regards, Krzysztof
