[PATCH] USB: clean up all iPod models in unusual_devs.h
Phil Dibowitz wrote: > 1. You're adding product IDs 1202, 1203, 1204, and 1205. 1203 was > already there, but you remove it, OK, but 1205 is already there, so > you'll need to fix that. I was not removing 1203, it's just the extension of the bcd range. You are right about 1205, as I wrote, it was a patch against 2.6.11.7. Attached is a patch against 2.6.12-rc2. > 2. I'm OK with the full bcd range if Apple is changing it on firmware > revs... fine, but it's bcd, not hex... 0x9999 =) I just copied from other entries. There're a lot 0xffffs in unusual_dev.h, so I assumed it is correct. I changed it to 0x9999. > 3. It's rather obnoxious to take the original submitter's credit away. I didn't remove it, I changed it to "based on...". Because I changed something (the range) in his entry, I thought it is the best to take the responsibility but keep the origin. Anyway, in the new patch I did it in a different way. > 4. Your /proc/bus/usb/devices shows 1204, but I see no evidence 1202 is > really an iPod. I don't have an old iPod mini, but you find a lot of evidence here: http://www.google.com/search?q=0x1202+ipod Especially this one: http://www.qbik.ch/usb/devices/showdescr.php?id=2737 > It also looks like 1205's entry is getting mangled, but I haven't > attempted to apply the patch, so I'm not sure. No, the patch was ok, but I agree it looks strange. It's not very readable, because I cannot tell diff to work blockwise instead of linewise. Because of the similarity of the entries, diff splits and merges them. Anyway, the new patch "looks" better. ;-) Signed-off-by: NSven Anderson <sven-linux@anderson.de> Signed-off-by: NPhil Dibowitz <phil@ipom.com> Signed-off-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Showing
想要评论请 注册 或 登录