Re: [PATCH v2 09/24] input: Port hid-dr to ff-memless-next

[simon]

> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:14:44PM +0000, madcatxster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
>> This is another case where even the old code was flawed, right? Should
>> I try to stuff the fixes into these patches or would a few extra
>> patches addressing these problems be an easier to review solution? I
>> can append such patches to the MLNX patchset.
>
> Changes addressing pre-existing problem should go into separate patches
> (preferably applicable first).
>

As a by-stander who would like to see MLNX move forward, should it be
heldback by pre-existing problems in drivers that the MLNX dev(s) don't
have hardware to test against...?

Simon.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/