From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753261Ab2LSIem (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 03:34:42 -0500 Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc ([80.244.247.6]:58864 "EHLO Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752768Ab2LSIec (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 03:34:32 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:34:30 +0100 From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: "Fangxiaozhi (Franko)" Cc: "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Xueguiying (Zihan)" , "Linlei (Lei Lin)" , "greg@kroah.com" , "Yili (Neil)" , "Wangyuhua (Roger, Credit)" , Huqiao , "balbi@ti.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]linux-usb:optimize to match the Huawei USB storage devices and support new switch command Message-ID: <20121219083430.GB3400@breakpoint.cc> References: <20121218141013.GB4939@breakpoint.cc> <910F9D9E13B84F4C8FA771DC9BDE99F326FCB006@szxeml546-mbs.china.huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <910F9D9E13B84F4C8FA771DC9BDE99F326FCB006@szxeml546-mbs.china.huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 03:13:32AM +0000, Fangxiaozhi (Franko) wrote: > By the way, I found the kernel is updated to 3.7.1 today. So I have to update my patch based on 3.7.1, and resubmit it? > Right? You should rebase your patch on top of Greg's usb-next branch of his usb tree. http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/gregkh/usb.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/usb-next but I guess that there are hardly any changes in that area. The last change in drivers/usb/storage/initializers.* is yours "USB: usb-storage fails to attach to Huawei Datacard cdrom device". If you call ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl on your patch you should learn that you miss |Matthew Dharm |usb-storage@lists.one-eyed-alien.net > > And shouldn't you read something from the us->recv_bulk_pipe after > > that? > Well, because our device will re-connect to switch the ports if it receives the command. > So it is not necessary to read the response of the command. Hmm. I guess this for Matthew / Greg to decide, I don't insist on anything. Maybe a comment would be nice because now it looks, atleast to me, that something is missing. Sebastian