Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 18 Nov 2019 10:24:19 +0100 (CET)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>
To:     Andrew Duggan <aduggan@synaptics.com>
cc:     "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>,
        Federico Cerutti <federico@ceres-c.it>,
        Christopher Heiny <Cheiny@synaptics.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: rmi: Check that the RMI_STARTED bit is set before
 unregistering the RMI transport device
In-Reply-To: <6931c116-78fb-9ad9-aab1-f15799118c82@synaptics.com>
Message-ID: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.1911181024040.1799@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
References: <20191023012344.20998-1-aduggan@synaptics.com> <nycvar.YFH.7.76.1911151626120.1799@cbobk.fhfr.pm> <6931c116-78fb-9ad9-aab1-f15799118c82@synaptics.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LSU 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 15 Nov 2019, Andrew Duggan wrote:

> Since this second patch was for the input subsystem I decided to just 
> make them separate patches instead of creating a series. However, based 
> on Dmitry's feedback it was determined that the second patch wasn't a 
> good idea and it won't be applied. This first patch is enough to fix the 
> issue by preventing the call to rmi_unregister_transport_device() if the 
> subsequent call to register failed. The only change I would make to this 
> patch would be to remove the last sentence of the comment. If you choose 
> to apply that patch then would this be a change you would make? Or would 
> you prefer I submit a v2 with this update?

I've modified the changelog and applied. Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs