[PATCH 1/1] V4L/DVB (9848): gspca: Webcam 06f8:3004 added in sonixj.

[Stefan Bader]

Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 11:10:46PM +0800, Bryan Wu wrote:
>> From: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf at free.fr>
>>
>> Bug: #374122
>> BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/jaunty/+source/linux/+bug/374122
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf at free.fr>
>> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab at redhat.com>
>> (cherry picked from commit 3319dc98a742d445a660268a6ce3426ad0922e2a)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <bryan.wu at canonical.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/video4linux/gspca.txt |    1 +
>>  drivers/media/video/gspca/sonixj.c  |    1 +
>>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/video4linux/gspca.txt b/Documentation/video4linux/gspca.txt
>> index 9cf57d8..a8370aa 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/video4linux/gspca.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/video4linux/gspca.txt
>> @@ -170,6 +170,7 @@ spca500		06bd:0404	Agfa CL20
>>  spca500		06be:0800	Optimedia
>>  sunplus		06d6:0031	Trust 610 LCD PowerC at m Zoom
>>  spca506		06e1:a190	ADS Instant VCD
>> +sonixj		06f8:3004	Hercules Classic Silver
>>  spca508		0733:0110	ViewQuest VQ110
>>  spca508		0130:0130	Clone Digital Webcam 11043
>>  spca501		0733:0401	Intel Create and Share
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/video/gspca/sonixj.c b/drivers/media/video/gspca/sonixj.c
>> index 53cb82d..b186609 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/video/gspca/sonixj.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/video/gspca/sonixj.c
>> @@ -1626,6 +1626,7 @@ static const __devinitdata struct usb_device_id device_table[] = {
>>  	{USB_DEVICE(0x0471, 0x0328), BSI(SN9C105, MI0360, 0x5d)},
>>  #endif
>>  	{USB_DEVICE(0x0471, 0x0330), BSI(SN9C105, MI0360, 0x5d)},
>> +	{USB_DEVICE(0x06f8, 0x3004), BSI(SN9C105, OV7660, 0x21)},
>>  	{USB_DEVICE(0x0c45, 0x6040), BSI(SN9C102P, HV7131R, 0x11)},
>>  /* bw600.inf:
>>  	{USB_DEVICE(0x0c45, 0x6040), BSI(SN9C102P, MI0360, 0x5d)}, */
>> -- 
>> 1.6.0.4
>>
> 
> I thought this was exactly the kind of device enablement patches that we
> would _NOT_ add to a releassed distro anymore?
> 
> Or did I interpret it incorrectly?
> 
> /Amit
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Amit Kucheria, Kernel Engineer || amit.kucheria at canonical.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
This is probably exact the type of patch that is in the grey zone. Surely you 
can run crack of the day but this can get you just the other problems you 
probably do not want. Karmic is not even beta, so IMO taking such simple 
enablement patches increases the value of the current release with little to no 
risk.
However the debugging and test approach should be done by crack of the day and 
not by spending much time to debug when it is already fixed upstream.

Stefan

-- 

When all other means of communication fail, try words!