From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:55120 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754558Ab0LGUAH (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2010 15:00:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 14:46:46 -0500 From: "John W. Linville" To: Sujith Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ath9k_htc: Fix suspend/resume Message-ID: <20101207194646.GG2700@tuxdriver.com> References: <19701.62091.644444.121284@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <20101202193024.GC2358@tuxdriver.com> <19704.23185.565826.890275@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <19709.45926.38551.25130@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <19709.45926.38551.25130@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 09:39:10AM +0530, Sujith wrote: > Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > Just curious, if you revert this patch and apply the ones I just > > posted, does it fix it, or is this patch required either way? > > Well, I don't see this patch in -testing, -next-2.6 or -2.6. > Maybe Linville overlooked this patch. Obviously I didn't overlook it, or I wouldn't have asked about whether or not it should go to 2.6.37... > Applying 4/5 and 5/5 from your series seems to fix the issue though. > I am able to suspend/resume without hiccups with UB95. But now this begs the question of whether this should be applied at all? John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.