Hi,
On 08-01-15 18:36, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Thursday, January 08, 2015 at 06:23:55 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 08-01-15 18:06, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Thursday, January 08, 2015 at 05:16:53 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 01/08/2015 01:34 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
Hi!
On 08-01-15 01:19, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 01/07/2015 04:35 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > On Tuesday, January 06, 2015 at 06:02:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
<snip>
>> Should we rename "usb reset" to "usb restart"? > > No, let's not mess with the UI any more than we already did.
Well, it might not be such a bad idea if the semantics are changing, to give people a heads-up?
Only the semantics of "usb start" are changing, and you are suggesting renaming "usb reset" which remains unchanged ...
Yes, that's true. So I suppose we should indeed not rename anything.
OK, let's go with this approach now.
So we are all in agreement, good, so through who's tree are these 2 patches going to go upstream ? Note I can take them upstream through the sunxi tree, but the usb tree seems better to me ...
I can pick them, shall I pick them as they are ?
Yes, AFAIK there were no requests for changes.
Are they for -next or current ?
They are intended for -next, the double usb scan when using a usb keyboard *and* booting from usb is a nuisance, but not fatal, and very few people actually use the combo, so given that current is about to be released in a couple of days lets play it safe :)
Regards,
Hans