Hi Guenter, On Sun, 9 Apr 2017 08:24:07 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Sun, Apr 09, 2017 at 03:38:06PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:05:03 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > I'll submit the patch as-is upstream; at least it doesn't break anything. > > > If it doesn't fix your problem, we'll have to look at it again at a later > > > point. > > > > Given that this patch fixes a regression in kernels v4.7 to v.4.10, > > shouldn't it go to stable@? > > The patch has a Fixes: tag, so that should happen automatically. > I'll have to check if it applies cleanly to earlier kernels and if > necessary send backport(s) to Greg.
I took a look at stable branches v4.9 and v4.10 and I can't find this fix. Do you still plan to check if the fix applies and poke Greg about it? Or do you want me to do it? > > As a side note, I think the second half of the patch is redundant, it > > only makes registration slightly faster on IT8705F, and could have bad > > side effects at least in theory. The first half seems sufficient to > > me... > > It only affects systems with two Super-IO chips, and I wanted to play safe. > The > worst side effect I can imagine would be that a second chip in a system with > IT8705 as first chip would not be accepted, which is not worse than before > when only one chip was supported. But isn't as good as doing the right thing, which would require less code. So I don't really follow your logic. -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hwmon" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
