Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757942Ab1EBVTs (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2011 17:19:48 -0400 Received: from v020138.sys.capside.net ([81.25.117.138]:34480 "EHLO n023010.sys.capside.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757390Ab1EBVTc (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2011 17:19:32 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 399 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 17:19:32 EDT Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 23:12:45 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?L=2E_Alberto_Gim=E9nez?= To: David Miller Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dgiagio@gmail.com, dborca@yahoo.com, pmcenery@gmail.com, david.hill@ubisoft.com, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipheth.c: Enable IP header alignment Message-ID: <20110502211245.GA18334@bart.evergreen.loc> References: <1304264799.2833.82.camel@localhost> <1304364912-15444-1-git-send-email-agimenez@sysvalve.es> <20110502.124622.226785624.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20110502.124622.226785624.davem@davemloft.net> 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 Content-Length: 1584 Lines: 46 On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 12:46:22PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > Why did this break things? Hi, I don't know. As upstream is unresponsive and is applying patches to his private repo without submitting them to the list (which I can understand), I decided to submit the particular fix so mainline users can get tethering working again. I received a forwarded email with the patch (I think that's because I submitted the driver to mainline) asking for the mainline driver status and if it was being maintained. > > I'm not applying a fix when nobody can explain the reason why: > > 1) Things broke in the first place > 2) Forcing reservation of 2 bytes fixes things Honestly, I can't answer either of those ones. I just submitted a patch that *seemed* to fix the problem (I don't own an iPhone device since long time ago), after explictly requesting upstream to submit by himself, and getting a negative. > Where is the built in assumption about "2" and why does it exist? Why > can't we fix this code not to have such assumptions in the first > place? Ditto. At this point, I think that David, Diego or Daniel should step in if they want to keep on with this discussion. I won't have problems if you want to take this off-list. Best regards, -- L. Alberto Gim?nez JabberID agimenez@jabber.sysvalve.es GnuPG key ID 0x3BAABDE1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/