From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751526Ab1HHPeo (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2011 11:34:44 -0400 Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:40041 "EHLO out3.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750973Ab1HHPen (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2011 11:34:43 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: MaaHAx/UOB08AEm6GI7goOSxRU69OhfHzTMcpQPcLeDV 1312817682 Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 08:33:02 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Andreas Hartmann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 3.0: broken ums_eneub6250 Message-ID: <20110808153302.GA8637@kroah.com> References: <20110808042231.GA6248@kroah.com> <4E3F9B71.7040206@01019freenet.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E3F9B71.7040206@01019freenet.de> 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 Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 10:16:49AM +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote: > Greg KH schrieb: > > On Sun, Aug 07, 2011 at 08:39:20PM +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> obviously, nobody seems to be interested to work on this bug. Until it's > >> fixed: There is a workaround to get the device working again with 2.6.39 > >> and 3.0 - just remove the unusable ums-eneub6250.ko and replace it with > >> the complete old and fine keucr-module - staging but working :-) > >> > >> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709243#c1 > > > > How about working on a patch for the in-kernel version of the code to > > get it to work properly so we can resolve this? > > If I would be able do this, I would have done it! On the other side: Why > should I do it, if there is a module, which works just fine? Because I'm guessing that you wish to see the in-kernel code work properly, right? > But you could send me patches which I could test. Have you emailed the developers of this driver these questions? I'm sure they could help you out as they do have the hardware and they wrote the patches in the first place. > > Given that very few > > people actually have this hardware, > > It's a MSI CR620 notebook. I don't think, that there are just very few > out there :-). > > > it's hard for us to work on the > > driver. > > Why did you remove a working module if you can't ensure, that the > replacement will cover the old module 100%? Because I trusted the original developers of that patch, that's the way kernel development works. So please contact them and they would be glad to work with you to resolve this issue. thanks, greg k-h