Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] USB: FHCI: Driver should be responsible for managing endpoint queues

Anton Vorontsov
2008-12-24T21:07:55Z

On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 12:58:35PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 12:18:53PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 23:08:45 +0300 Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 11:59:36AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 10:13:03PM +0300, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > > > > Follow these changes for the FHCI driver:
> > > >
> > > > Hm, would it just make more sense to respin the whole driver? That way
> > > > it's never in the tree in a "broken" state?
> > >
> > > It's for -mm tree. If I understand -mm workflow correctly, Andrew
> > > will merge all the fixes into the final patch before sending it to
> > > you in late -rc0 phase, when various -next git trees (on which this
> > > driver depend) will be merged into the Linus tree.
> > >
> > > Andrew, am I correct?
> >
> > Yes, that's what I do.
> >
> > I prefer to see the incremental patches once a patch has had review or
> > testing, so we can see which bits changed. But if Greg intends to
> > merge this driver then he'd probably prefer a fresh new patch,
> > particularly as a) version 1 was only sent yesterday and b) he hasn't
> > merged version #1.
>
> I do intend to merge it, given that it's in a buildable format :)

The point was that it's not buildable without linux-next queue
(mainly few patches from the powerpc-next git tree). So if you
apply it onto the pure linux-usb tree it won't build. Though it
will build in the -mm tree, as -mm bases on the linux-next.

That's exactly why I asked Andrew to merge it into the -mm tree
in the first place -- he would resend it to you at appropriate
time.

Thanks,

--
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2