Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:53:13 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: Dropping WUSB/UWB from my patch queue |
| |
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:03:28AM +0100, David Vrabel wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > > Hi David,
Sorry for the delay, was on vacation all last week without email access, and am on a business trip this week with very limited email access :(
> > In looking further at the WUSB/UWB code, it doesn't look like it is > > going to make it for the 2.6.27 kernel tree due to the reliance on some > > contriversial core USB changes as well as a total lack of documentation > > for the sysfs apis. > > I assume you are referring to the usb_dev_reset_delayed() change here. > This is only required by the wire adapter code and should not prevent > the majority of the UWB and WUSB stack from being merged.
Ok, thanks for letting me know, I did not realize this.
> You should postpone: > > usb-add-usb_dev_reset_delayed.patch > wusb-add-the-wire-adapter-core.patch > wusb-add-hwa-hc-wireless-host-controller-driver.patch > wusb-wa-abort-rpipe-request-type-fix.patch
Will the code still work properly for users with these patches removed? If so, I'll reconsider sending this for 2.6.27.
> I will correct the lack of sysfs API documentation this week. Please > advise on where the documentation should go and its style and format. > Be aware that some of the API is experimental and subject to change. I > will ensure the documentation is clear on this and that the Kconfig > entries depend on EXPERIMENTAL. > > Would this be sufficient to reinstate the majority of the UWB and WUSB > stacks for 2.6.27?
Yes. I'll take what you sent me, and try to reorder things to make it so that we can get the majority of the code into .27, I don't want this to live outside the tree for any longer either, that's why I started working on getting this mess cleaned up in the first place :)
> > Because of this, I've dropped all of the patches from my USB queue, so > > they will no longer show up in the -next releases anymore. > > In future, it would be appreciated if any issues with UWB patches are > discussed rather than summarily dropping them.
Hey, they were not "dropped" in the format that they suddenly disappeared, they are still around and useful :)
thanks,
greg k-h
| |