Return-Path: <cyrus@holtmann.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Regression fixes for rfcomm/tty.c
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140106174234.GA23339@sottospazio.it>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 10:19:14 -0800
Cc: "Gustavo F. Padovan" <gustavo@padovan.org>,
	peter@hurleysoftware.com,
	"linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org development"
	<linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, jslaby@suse.cz,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Message-Id: <D10B3789-35B6-4B13-A1F4-B21E50DB346D@holtmann.org>
References: <1388853038-6917-1-git-send-email-gianluca@sottospazio.it> <D4D6DA93-0C44-4F35-AD45-9EDE4775B052@holtmann.org> <20140106174234.GA23339@sottospazio.it>
To: Gianluca Anzolin <gianluca@sottospazio.it>
Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-bluetooth.vger.kernel.org>

Hi Gianluca,

>> I applied both patches to bluetooth-next to expose them wider testing. I like to have them go through bluetooth-next first before we push them back into -stable.
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Marcel
>> 
> 
> Thank you for the reply, however there is another regression and the fix would
> make the second patch unnecessary.
> 
> Would it be better if I resend a second iteration of patches? There would be 4
> patches, two fixes and two which move code around.

send it and I will have a look.

Regards

Marcel