On Thu, 24 Jan 2013, Lan Tianyu wrote:

> > > +                     status = usb_disable_function_remotewakeup(udev);
> >
> > Don't call that function here.  Just put the code here and run it
> > directly.  Then you can get rid of the old function.
> >
> usb_disable_function_remotewakeup���� is  just introduced at last patch to
> resolve too more  indentation.
> So it's ok to remove it so quickly ? Or I should merge these two patches?

I thought the purpose of patch 1/2 was to have something that could be 
applied to the -stable kernels.  Isn't that what Sarah asked for?  A 
short fix, followed by another patch that would clean up the mess.

Alan Stern

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to