Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755448Ab1FMX47 (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:56:59 -0400 Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:37412 "EHLO out4.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755397Ab1FMX45 (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:56:57 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: iY8895B4gejfJ/qonDoSe5bjdh765zjdrXDSDm2/N262 1308009416 Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:55:49 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Jason Stubbs Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform: fix samsung brightness min/max calculations Message-ID: <20110613235549.GA14762@kroah.com> References: <201104201358.50443.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> <201105121214.00015.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> <20110512164402.GD26585@kroah.com> <201105132044.25928.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201105132044.25928.jasonbstubbs@gmail.com> 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: 2438 Lines: 54 On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 08:44:25PM +1000, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Fri, 13 May 2011 02:44:02 Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:13:59PM +1000, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 May 2011 23:51:14 Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 02:47:49PM +1000, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > > > The patch doesn't apply cleanly on top of the nc210/nc110 patch > > > > > though as they both modify set_brightness(). It might apply with a > > > > > higher fuzz factor as the changes don't actually clash. Should I > > > > > redo the patch? > > > > > > > > Please do. > > > > > > Will send seperately. Doing this though, I found a problem with the > > > nc210/nc110 patch in that (user_level == read_brightness()) check should > > > actually be (user_brightness == read_brightness()). What should I do > > > about this? > > > > I don't know, as you seem to understand this better than I do at this > > point, I'll trust your changes :) > > I meant that patch A is broken but (working) patch B applies on top of patch > A so should I submit a patch C to fix patch A, submit a fixed patch A and > then resubmit a patch B against that, or... I'm just unsure of the > development process. > > As far as I can tell, the patches aren't applied to any trees yet and are > just sitting in .../gregkh/patches.git. If that's the case, what I would like > is for fix-samsung-brightness-min-max-calculations.patch to be replaced with > the version in https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/20/1 and I resubmit a fixed (and > enhanced) add-support-for-samsung-nc210-nc110.patch that applies on top of > it. That way an enhancement patch won't hold up a bugfix patch should there > be any further issues. Ok, I'll drop this one, but can you resend the above referenced patch so I can apply it? I'll also update your last patch you sent as well. Sorry for the delay in working on this, my access to a samsung laptop is now gone, and I've been swamped with other stuff. Any chance you want to take over maintaining this driver now yourself? You seem to have a much better understanding of it in places than I do at the moment, combined with a strong need to keep it working properly :) thanks, greg k-h -- 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/