On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 05:36:48PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:59 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
/* The first entry is a placeholder for the insmod-specified device */
-{ USB_DEVICE(0x049F, 0x0003) },
Is it obvious why this patch is correct? Especially
On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 05:43 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 05:36:48PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:59 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
/* The first entry is a placeholder for the insmod-specified
device */
- { USB_DEVICE(0x049F, 0x0003)
On Thu, 17 May 2007 09:02:20 EDT, Ben Collins said:
So we just have to live with it, and the infinitesimal speed hit it
creates :)
Any objection to adding it to planned-for-removal and spitting out a
printk when someone uses the feature?
Do we have any good reason to believe that this
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 09:02:20AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 05:43 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 05:36:48PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:59 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
/* The first entry is a placeholder for the
/* The first entry is a placeholder for the insmod-specified device */
-{ USB_DEVICE(0x049F, 0x0003) },
Is it obvious why this patch is correct? Especially given the
comment just before the line you delete, and the code
if (vendor) {
Ben Collins napsal(a):
Cc: Ganesh Varadarajan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Signed-off-by: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c b/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c
index 4df0ec7..7c85be4 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c
+++
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:59 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
/* The first entry is a placeholder for the insmod-specified device */
- { USB_DEVICE(0x049F, 0x0003) },
Is it obvious why this patch is correct? Especially given the
comment just before the line you delete, and the code
