From: Ike Panhc <ike.pan@canonical.com>
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Cc: reinette chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@intel.com>,
"stable@kernel.org" <stable@kernel.org>,
"Guy, Wey-Yi W" <wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com>,
"Zhu, Yi" <yi.zhu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH 2/2] iwlwifi: unify iwl_setup_rxon_timing
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:46:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B288232.4060901@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091215194938.GA13297@kroah.com>
Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:42:48AM -0800, reinette chatre wrote:
>> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 08:31 -0800, John W. Linville wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 05:49:43AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 03:02:17PM +0800, Ike Panhc wrote:
>>>>> Please consider applying to linux-2.6.31.y
>>>> I need the subsystem maintainer to agree with this, have they?
>>> It seems fine to me. You may want to let Intel comment too.
>>>
>> No objection here. Even so, I find it strange that this patch fixes a
>> problem since it really should not have any functional changes.
>
> Ok, if there is no functional change, why is this needed?
>
> Ike?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
I review the patch again. Yes, it is no functional change. Sorry I have
misunderstanding about the patch. Please do not put the second patch into
stable.
But Please consider applying the first patch (change IWL6000_UCODE_API_MAX
to v4) to 2.6.31-stable tree. It will be good to use v4 firmware on iwl6000.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-16 6:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-15 3:44 [PATCH 0/2] Fix iwl6000 does not work in 2.6.31 kernel Ike Panhc
2009-12-15 3:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] iwlwifi: change IWL6000_UCODE_API_MAX to v4 Ike Panhc
2009-12-15 3:45 ` [PATCH 2/2] iwlwifi: unify iwl_setup_rxon_timing Ike Panhc
2009-12-15 4:15 ` [stable] " Greg KH
2009-12-15 7:02 ` Ike Panhc
2009-12-15 13:49 ` Greg KH
2009-12-15 16:31 ` John W. Linville
2009-12-15 19:42 ` reinette chatre
2009-12-15 19:49 ` Greg KH
2009-12-16 6:46 ` Ike Panhc [this message]
2009-12-16 14:55 ` Greg KH
2009-12-16 17:05 ` reinette chatre
2009-12-17 1:52 ` Ike Panhc
2009-12-17 3:29 ` Greg KH
2009-12-15 16:34 ` Marcel Holtmann
2009-12-15 16:39 ` John W. Linville
2009-12-15 17:14 ` Greg KH
2009-12-15 17:27 ` Stefan Bader
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B288232.4060901@canonical.com \
--to=ike.pan@canonical.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=stable@kernel.org \
--cc=tomas.winkler@intel.com \
--cc=wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com \
--cc=yi.zhu@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox