On Sun, 8 Aug 2004, Greg KH wrote: > Very sorry about this. Right before OLS and the kernel summit, I backed > out the patches you had sent that dealt with the device locking issues, > due to them not always working, and the added complexity. I did that to > be able to send the rest of the patches off to Linus, which he accepted. > > I was counting on adding these patches back afterward, when I had a > chance to go over them in better detail. Unfortunately, I had to give 3 > talks at OSCON the week after OLS, and then LWE took me out of the loop > for a few days. > > So, I should now be caught up. I've applied everything that people had > sent me as of last Friday that I agreed with (some I didn't, like the > usbfs locking changes.) If you want to send me the patches, rediffed > against the current trees, as you think they are in better shape now, > and don't have the race conditions that I and others hit pretty easily, > please do.
Okay. When the current discussion about locktree() between me and David settles down I'll redo the three patches that are still missing and send them to you. What with other things changing in the meantime, the original versions are no longer quite correct. > Does this help explain stuff more? Yes, thanks. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now, one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
