On 10/16/2009 09:44 AM, John W. Linville wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 08:42:08AM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: >> On 10/14/2009 03:06 AM, Michael Buesch wrote: >>> On Wednesday 14 October 2009 03:25:30 Larry Finger wrote: >>>> Commit 93bad2b757586fb153ef73b028953a8dcaccde77 entitled "b43: Fix PPC >>>> crash >>>> in rfkill polling on unload" fixed the bug reported in Bugzilla No. 14181; >>>> however, it introduced a new bug. Whenever the radio switch was turned off, >>>> it was necessary to unload and reload the driver for it to recognize the >>>> switch again. >>>> >>>> I believe this patch fixes the original problem without introducing any new >>>> problems. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Larry Finger <larry.fin...@lwfinger.net> >>>> --- >>>> > >> As Michael correctly points out, this patch substitutes one bug for >> another. The current bug affects every bcm43xx device with an rfkill >> switch except BCM4306/3, and the new bug only affects BCM4306/3 users >> with a kill switch. As the latter group may be the empty set, I think >> the trade-off is worth it. >> >> An additional complication is that I do not have the hardware to test >> the PPC faults. The OP of Bugzilla #14181 has been helpful; however, >> if it takes several tries to get a fix, we might miss the 2.6.32 >> release, which would introduce a significant regression. >> >> For the above reasons, I am suggesting that this patch be accepted and >> pushed to mainline even though it has faults. > > Well, hmmm...ok, we have two or three problems here... :-) > > One is whether or not to take this patch. Normally it is against > policy or whatnot to trade one bug for another. In this case, > it seems we would fix a real bug in exchange for a theorhetical > bug that we believe no one actually has. Is that the case? If so, > that might be acceptable.
Yes, I believe that to be the case. > The other problem is a work/patch flow issue. I have occasionally > (some would say too often) snagged a patch directly from this list. > But in general I have waited for Michael to repost the patches to > linux-wireless before merging them. As such, I'm unaccustomed to > collecting patches from here. In any event, most patches should be > posted to linux-wireless for wider review before merging. That would > normally be the maintainer's job, but we are effectively without one > for b43 now. I don't suppose anyone wants to stand-up? I would, but my RE work precludes that. > The third problem (related to the second) is that I missed the > original post, so if you don't mind I'd like you to resend it (to > linux-wireless)! :-) Will do. Larry _______________________________________________ Bcm43xx-dev mailing list Bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
