* [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
@ 2013-02-13 15:58 Christian Gmeiner
2013-02-13 15:54 ` Greg KH
2013-02-15 22:47 ` Bryan Wu
0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Christian Gmeiner @ 2013-02-13 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cooloney, linux-next, linux-kernel, stable, akpm; +Cc: Christian Gmeiner
During the development of this driver an in-house register
documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
the released register documentation is wrong.
The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
great to fix this upstream.
Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
---
drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c | 14 +++++++-------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c b/drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c
index ee14662..98cae52 100644
--- a/drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c
+++ b/drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c
@@ -47,37 +47,37 @@ static struct ot200_led leds[] = {
{
.name = "led_1",
.port = 0x49,
- .mask = BIT(7),
+ .mask = BIT(6),
},
{
.name = "led_2",
.port = 0x49,
- .mask = BIT(6),
+ .mask = BIT(5),
},
{
.name = "led_3",
.port = 0x49,
- .mask = BIT(5),
+ .mask = BIT(4),
},
{
.name = "led_4",
.port = 0x49,
- .mask = BIT(4),
+ .mask = BIT(3),
},
{
.name = "led_5",
.port = 0x49,
- .mask = BIT(3),
+ .mask = BIT(2),
},
{
.name = "led_6",
.port = 0x49,
- .mask = BIT(2),
+ .mask = BIT(1),
},
{
.name = "led_7",
.port = 0x49,
- .mask = BIT(1),
+ .mask = BIT(0),
}
};
--
1.7.12.2.421.g261b511
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-02-13 15:58 [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks Christian Gmeiner
@ 2013-02-13 15:54 ` Greg KH
2013-02-15 22:47 ` Bryan Wu
1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2013-02-13 15:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Gmeiner; +Cc: cooloney, linux-next, linux-kernel, stable, akpm
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 04:58:30PM +0100, Christian Gmeiner wrote:
> During the development of this driver an in-house register
> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
> the released register documentation is wrong.
>
> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>
> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
> great to fix this upstream.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c | 14 +++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
<formletter>
This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
stable kernel tree. Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
for how to do this properly.
</formletter>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-02-13 15:58 [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks Christian Gmeiner
2013-02-13 15:54 ` Greg KH
@ 2013-02-15 22:47 ` Bryan Wu
2013-02-23 9:20 ` Christian Gmeiner
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Bryan Wu @ 2013-02-15 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Gmeiner, akpm; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, stable
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Christian Gmeiner
<christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> During the development of this driver an in-house register
> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
> the released register documentation is wrong.
>
> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>
> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
> great to fix this upstream.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
Thanks, Christian.
And Andrew, are you going to take care of this patch? Or I will merge this.
-Bryan
> ---
> drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c | 14 +++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c b/drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c
> index ee14662..98cae52 100644
> --- a/drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c
> +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-ot200.c
> @@ -47,37 +47,37 @@ static struct ot200_led leds[] = {
> {
> .name = "led_1",
> .port = 0x49,
> - .mask = BIT(7),
> + .mask = BIT(6),
> },
> {
> .name = "led_2",
> .port = 0x49,
> - .mask = BIT(6),
> + .mask = BIT(5),
> },
> {
> .name = "led_3",
> .port = 0x49,
> - .mask = BIT(5),
> + .mask = BIT(4),
> },
> {
> .name = "led_4",
> .port = 0x49,
> - .mask = BIT(4),
> + .mask = BIT(3),
> },
> {
> .name = "led_5",
> .port = 0x49,
> - .mask = BIT(3),
> + .mask = BIT(2),
> },
> {
> .name = "led_6",
> .port = 0x49,
> - .mask = BIT(2),
> + .mask = BIT(1),
> },
> {
> .name = "led_7",
> .port = 0x49,
> - .mask = BIT(1),
> + .mask = BIT(0),
> }
> };
>
> --
> 1.7.12.2.421.g261b511
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-02-15 22:47 ` Bryan Wu
@ 2013-02-23 9:20 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-03-04 7:40 ` Christian Gmeiner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Christian Gmeiner @ 2013-02-23 9:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Wu; +Cc: akpm, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
2013/2/15 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Christian Gmeiner
> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> During the development of this driver an in-house register
>> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
>> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
>> the released register documentation is wrong.
>>
>> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>>
>> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
>> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
>> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
>> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
>> great to fix this upstream.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
>
> Thanks, Christian.
>
> And Andrew, are you going to take care of this patch? Or I will merge this.
>
Whats the current state of the patch? Hope we can get it into 3.9 :)
--
Christian Gmeiner, MSc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-02-23 9:20 ` Christian Gmeiner
@ 2013-03-04 7:40 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-03-05 18:46 ` Bryan Wu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Christian Gmeiner @ 2013-03-04 7:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Wu; +Cc: akpm, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
ping
--
Christian Gmeiner, MSc
2013/2/23 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
> 2013/2/15 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Christian Gmeiner
>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> During the development of this driver an in-house register
>>> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
>>> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
>>> the released register documentation is wrong.
>>>
>>> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>>>
>>> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
>>> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
>>> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
>>> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
>>> great to fix this upstream.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
>>
>> Thanks, Christian.
>>
>> And Andrew, are you going to take care of this patch? Or I will merge this.
>>
>
> Whats the current state of the patch? Hope we can get it into 3.9 :)
>
> --
> Christian Gmeiner, MSc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-03-04 7:40 ` Christian Gmeiner
@ 2013-03-05 18:46 ` Bryan Wu
2013-03-08 7:26 ` Christian Gmeiner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Bryan Wu @ 2013-03-05 18:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Gmeiner; +Cc: akpm, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Christian Gmeiner
<christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> ping
> --
> Christian Gmeiner, MSc
>
>
> 2013/2/23 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>> 2013/2/15 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Christian Gmeiner
>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> During the development of this driver an in-house register
>>>> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
>>>> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
>>>> the released register documentation is wrong.
>>>>
>>>> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>>>>
>>>> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
>>>> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
>>>> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
>>>> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
>>>> great to fix this upstream.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Thanks, Christian.
>>>
>>> And Andrew, are you going to take care of this patch? Or I will merge this.
>>>
>>
>> Whats the current state of the patch? Hope we can get it into 3.9 :)
>>
I think this patch is already in linux-next via Andrew's tree (commit
023206171f235f93f26c314f76f5405a3077aaba). So it will be merged into
3.10 I guess, but not 3.9.
Or I can send out this patch to Linus as a fix and ask Andrew to drop
this from his tree.
Thanks,
-Bryan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-03-05 18:46 ` Bryan Wu
@ 2013-03-08 7:26 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-05-12 10:11 ` Christian Gmeiner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Christian Gmeiner @ 2013-03-08 7:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Wu; +Cc: akpm, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
2013/3/5 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Christian Gmeiner
> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ping
>> --
>> Christian Gmeiner, MSc
>>
>>
>> 2013/2/23 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>>> 2013/2/15 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Christian Gmeiner
>>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> During the development of this driver an in-house register
>>>>> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
>>>>> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
>>>>> the released register documentation is wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
>>>>> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
>>>>> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
>>>>> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
>>>>> great to fix this upstream.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Christian.
>>>>
>>>> And Andrew, are you going to take care of this patch? Or I will merge this.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Whats the current state of the patch? Hope we can get it into 3.9 :)
>>>
>
> I think this patch is already in linux-next via Andrew's tree (commit
> 023206171f235f93f26c314f76f5405a3077aaba). So it will be merged into
> 3.10 I guess, but not 3.9.
>
> Or I can send out this patch to Linus as a fix and ask Andrew to drop
> this from his tree.
>
I am fine with the current situation and 3.10 is fine too.
thanks
--
Christian Gmeiner, MSc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-03-08 7:26 ` Christian Gmeiner
@ 2013-05-12 10:11 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-05-14 7:06 ` Christian Gmeiner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Christian Gmeiner @ 2013-05-12 10:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Wu; +Cc: akpm, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
2013/3/8 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
> 2013/3/5 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Christian Gmeiner
>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> ping
>>> --
>>> Christian Gmeiner, MSc
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/2/23 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>>>> 2013/2/15 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Christian Gmeiner
>>>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> During the development of this driver an in-house register
>>>>>> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
>>>>>> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
>>>>>> the released register documentation is wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
>>>>>> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
>>>>>> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
>>>>>> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
>>>>>> great to fix this upstream.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, Christian.
>>>>>
>>>>> And Andrew, are you going to take care of this patch? Or I will merge this.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Whats the current state of the patch? Hope we can get it into 3.9 :)
>>>>
>>
>> I think this patch is already in linux-next via Andrew's tree (commit
>> 023206171f235f93f26c314f76f5405a3077aaba). So it will be merged into
>> 3.10 I guess, but not 3.9.
>>
>> Or I can send out this patch to Linus as a fix and ask Andrew to drop
>> this from his tree.
>>
>
> I am fine with the current situation and 3.10 is fine too.
>
3.10-rc1 is out but my patch is missing. What happened?
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/?id=refs%2Ftags%2Fv3.10-rc1&qt=author&q=gmeiner
--
Christian Gmeiner, MSc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-05-12 10:11 ` Christian Gmeiner
@ 2013-05-14 7:06 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-05-14 17:12 ` Bryan Wu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Christian Gmeiner @ 2013-05-14 7:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Wu; +Cc: akpm, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
2013/5/12 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
> 2013/3/8 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>> 2013/3/5 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Christian Gmeiner
>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> ping
>>>> --
>>>> Christian Gmeiner, MSc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/2/23 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>>>>> 2013/2/15 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Christian Gmeiner
>>>>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> During the development of this driver an in-house register
>>>>>>> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
>>>>>>> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
>>>>>>> the released register documentation is wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
>>>>>>> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
>>>>>>> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
>>>>>>> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
>>>>>>> great to fix this upstream.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks, Christian.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And Andrew, are you going to take care of this patch? Or I will merge this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Whats the current state of the patch? Hope we can get it into 3.9 :)
>>>>>
>>>
>>> I think this patch is already in linux-next via Andrew's tree (commit
>>> 023206171f235f93f26c314f76f5405a3077aaba). So it will be merged into
>>> 3.10 I guess, but not 3.9.
>>>
>>> Or I can send out this patch to Linus as a fix and ask Andrew to drop
>>> this from his tree.
>>>
>>
>> I am fine with the current situation and 3.10 is fine too.
>>
>
> 3.10-rc1 is out but my patch is missing. What happened?
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/?id=refs%2Ftags%2Fv3.10-rc1&qt=author&q=gmeiner
>
ping
--
Christian Gmeiner, MSc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-05-14 7:06 ` Christian Gmeiner
@ 2013-05-14 17:12 ` Bryan Wu
2013-05-14 17:16 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Bryan Wu @ 2013-05-14 17:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Gmeiner; +Cc: akpm, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Christian Gmeiner
<christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/5/12 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>> 2013/3/8 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>>> 2013/3/5 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Christian Gmeiner
>>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> ping
>>>>> --
I found this patch is still in linux-next, I'm not sure whether it
will be merged into 3.10 like a bug fixing. We need to wait Andrew's
reply. I'm OK to pick up and send out to Linus as a bug fixing.
Thanks,
-Bryan
>>>>> Christian Gmeiner, MSc
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2013/2/23 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>>>>>> 2013/2/15 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Christian Gmeiner
>>>>>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> During the development of this driver an in-house register
>>>>>>>> documentation was used. The last weeks some integration tests
>>>>>>>> were done and this problem was found. It turned out that
>>>>>>>> the released register documentation is wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The fix is very simple: shift all masks by one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Our customers can control LEDs from userspace via Java,
>>>>>>>> C++ or what every. They have running/working applications where
>>>>>>>> they want to control led_3 but led_2 get's used.
>>>>>>>> I got a bug report in our in-house bug tracker so it would be
>>>>>>>> great to fix this upstream.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks, Christian.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And Andrew, are you going to take care of this patch? Or I will merge this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whats the current state of the patch? Hope we can get it into 3.9 :)
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think this patch is already in linux-next via Andrew's tree (commit
>>>> 023206171f235f93f26c314f76f5405a3077aaba). So it will be merged into
>>>> 3.10 I guess, but not 3.9.
>>>>
>>>> Or I can send out this patch to Linus as a fix and ask Andrew to drop
>>>> this from his tree.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am fine with the current situation and 3.10 is fine too.
>>>
>>
>> 3.10-rc1 is out but my patch is missing. What happened?
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/?id=refs%2Ftags%2Fv3.10-rc1&qt=author&q=gmeiner
>>
>
> ping
> --
> Christian Gmeiner, MSc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-05-14 17:12 ` Bryan Wu
@ 2013-05-14 17:16 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-14 17:36 ` Bryan Wu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2013-05-14 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Wu; +Cc: Christian Gmeiner, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
On Tue, 14 May 2013 10:12:04 -0700 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Christian Gmeiner
> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2013/5/12 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
> >> 2013/3/8 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
> >>> 2013/3/5 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
> >>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Christian Gmeiner
> >>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> ping
> >>>>> --
>
> I found this patch is still in linux-next, I'm not sure whether it
> will be merged into 3.10 like a bug fixing. We need to wait Andrew's
> reply. I'm OK to pick up and send out to Linus as a bug fixing.
whome, I'd forgotten I had this. I stuck a cc:stable on the end and
shall send it in to Linus in the next 3.10 batch, OK?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-05-14 17:16 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2013-05-14 17:36 ` Bryan Wu
2013-05-15 6:38 ` Christian Gmeiner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Bryan Wu @ 2013-05-14 17:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: Christian Gmeiner, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 May 2013 10:12:04 -0700 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Christian Gmeiner
>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 2013/5/12 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>> >> 2013/3/8 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>> >>> 2013/3/5 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Christian Gmeiner
>> >>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> ping
>> >>>>> --
>>
>> I found this patch is still in linux-next, I'm not sure whether it
>> will be merged into 3.10 like a bug fixing. We need to wait Andrew's
>> reply. I'm OK to pick up and send out to Linus as a bug fixing.
>
> whome, I'd forgotten I had this. I stuck a cc:stable on the end and
> shall send it in to Linus in the next 3.10 batch, OK?
>
No problem for me at all. I bet it's OK for Christian as well, since
merging into 3.10-rc1 has no difference with merging into 3.10-rc2 or
later. It will eventually show up in 3.10 release.
Thanks,
-Bryan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks
2013-05-14 17:36 ` Bryan Wu
@ 2013-05-15 6:38 ` Christian Gmeiner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Christian Gmeiner @ 2013-05-15 6:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Wu; +Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML, stable
2013/5/14 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 May 2013 10:12:04 -0700 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Christian Gmeiner
>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > 2013/5/12 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>>> >> 2013/3/8 Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>:
>>> >>> 2013/3/5 Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>:
>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Christian Gmeiner
>>> >>>> <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>> ping
>>> >>>>> --
>>>
>>> I found this patch is still in linux-next, I'm not sure whether it
>>> will be merged into 3.10 like a bug fixing. We need to wait Andrew's
>>> reply. I'm OK to pick up and send out to Linus as a bug fixing.
>>
>> whome, I'd forgotten I had this. I stuck a cc:stable on the end and
>> shall send it in to Linus in the next 3.10 batch, OK?
>>
>
> No problem for me at all. I bet it's OK for Christian as well, since
> merging into 3.10-rc1 has no difference with merging into 3.10-rc2 or
> later. It will eventually show up in 3.10 release.
>
I am fine with that... it would be great if the patch will show up in 3.10.
thanks
--
Christian Gmeiner, MSc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-05-15 6:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-02-13 15:58 [PATCH] leds-ot200: Fix misbehavior caused by wrong bit masks Christian Gmeiner
2013-02-13 15:54 ` Greg KH
2013-02-15 22:47 ` Bryan Wu
2013-02-23 9:20 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-03-04 7:40 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-03-05 18:46 ` Bryan Wu
2013-03-08 7:26 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-05-12 10:11 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-05-14 7:06 ` Christian Gmeiner
2013-05-14 17:12 ` Bryan Wu
2013-05-14 17:16 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-14 17:36 ` Bryan Wu
2013-05-15 6:38 ` Christian Gmeiner
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.