Messages in this thread | | | From | "Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH/RFC] parport_pc: remove ancient, overeager quirk that disables EPP support on many chipsets | Date | Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:09:28 +0200 |
| |
A Dijous, 15 de setembre de 2011, Jonathan Nieder va escriure: > Adam Baker wrote: > > > The code has sat around for a long time because when I first posted the patch > > I got no feedback to indicate if anyone else was suffering from the bug and if > > anyone else had hardware that exhibited the bug it was supposed to fix so I > > didn't want to pursue submitting it. Over the years I have seen occasional > > reports of users suffering from the problem but I no longer have any EPP > > hardware to test it on. > > > > That's why I posted the mail that said if someone else can verify the patch is > > still useful I'm happy for it to be submitted with my signed off by on it > > Makes sense. Thanks for explaining and thanks for your work, Adam. > Actually I think 3 years before a patch gets the attention it deserves > is not so bad --- it was mostly that the problem has been known since > 1999 that bothered me. :) >
Well,
seems that the questions be clarified. I would like to point some details. First of all I would like to say that I didn't make this patch. It was done by Adam Baker, as I have posted in all the mails with the link to the original post.
I put a bug report the the debian bug tracking system [1] with a copy to the linux-parport list. The debian guys ( Jonathan Nieder) proposed me to send this patch directly to the linux kernel system.
I have send this patch as I could, maybe I didn't pay so attention as I must. I send the patch because Adam Baker said:
<quote> As the parport driver is currently orphaned you need to post a patch to the LKML if you want to get it included in mainline but if your prepared to do some testing that would be the best solution for everyone. </quote>
I submitted the patch because it seemed impolite to ask Adam Baker that he did it. In the end it was I who had interest in it to be included in the kernel tree.
And as I was who had to answer the mails of the kernel list and make the whole procedure of the kernel patches, so I signed it.
To me is perfect that this patch goes to the kernel and I could answer any question of it, or make any test. I have several Dell boxes and a PCI with an extra parport.
Best regards,
Leo
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=630593 -- -- Linux User 152692 Catalonia
| |