From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1760478AbYB0WAz@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1760478AbYB0WAz (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:00:55 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757771AbYB0WAo
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:00:44 -0500
Received: from vs166246.vserver.de ([62.75.166.246]:57710 "EHLO
	vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1757043AbYB0WAn (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:00:43 -0500
From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix the bcm43xx driver breakage in 2.6.24/25.
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:58:33 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405)
Cc: Larry Finger <larry.finger@lwfinger.net>,
       Alexey Zaytsev <alexey.zaytsev@gmail.com>,
       Stefano Brivio <stefano.brivio@polimi.it>,
       Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
       Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <47C01D03.9030601@gmail.com> <47C19ABA.4040904@lwfinger.net> <20080227201550.GG3078@tuxdriver.com>
In-Reply-To: <20080227201550.GG3078@tuxdriver.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200802272258.33888.mb@bu3sch.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wednesday 27 February 2008 21:15:50 John W. Linville wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 09:26:34AM -0700, Larry Finger wrote:
> 
> > I have reviewed the above patches and tested them with what I believe to be 
> > most combinations. Everything worked and corrected the unintended 
> > consequence of breaking bcm43xx when b44 is included. I agree that these 
> > patches belong in 2.6.25 and stable (2.6.24). Of course, the problem goes 
> > away in 2.6.26.
> 
> I can't say I really like Alexey's patches, but I guess they are OK.
> I think I like the "b43_pci_bridge as a module" option a little better,
> but as Michael illustrated there are problems with that approach too.

Well, I do like  "b43_pci_bridge as a module" more than this inter-dependency
crap. Yeah, I don't like "b43_pci_bridge as a module" a lot, but certainly
more than Alexey's patch.

-- 
Greetings Michael.