Comment 173 for bug 296610

Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-01-19 at 00:36 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 03:23:12PM +0100, Stefan Bader wrote:
>>> I am a bit uncertain about this patch in stable from the view of regression
>>> avoidance. Looking over the patch its hard to tell for certain whether the path
>>> of execution is the same as before for the non-interleaved protocol.
>>> Dmitry, how do you feel about it? Or maybe there has even be positive testing
>>> with non-interleaved hardware with that patch.
>> Umm, it is a bit large for -stable to my taste. However without the
>> patch the affected laptops are pretty much unusable so I think we better
>> get it in. The non-interleaved devices should continue to work fine, at
>> least I don't see any adverse effects on my d630 (caveat - I am not
>> using _this_ version of the patch but rather what is currently in Linus's
>> tree).
> [...]
>
> For what it's worth, we already added this to Debian kernel packages and
> I don't believe we've seen any bug reports related to it.
>
> Ben.
>
That sounds good. Thanks for that feedback Ben. For the Ubuntu part, I dicussed
this with Andy and we agreed to take it into Lucid first and then roll it back
to Karmic after a little delay.

-Stefan