| From | Michal Malý <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 09/24] input: Port hid-dr to ff-memless-next | Date | Wed, 23 Apr 2014 17:57:20 +0200 |
| |
On Wednesday 23 of April 2014 11:47:05 simon@mungewell.org wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:14:44PM +0000, madcatxster@devoid-pointer.net > > > > 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.
Either approach is fine be me - I can rebase the MLNX patchset against the fixes and submit it again. I suppose that this is a good opportunity to fix a bunch old issues that would pass unnoticed otherwise. I would however appreciate as much comments regarding MLNX itself before I begin cleaning the ancient dust.
Thanks for your input, Michal
|