From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: acpi git versus x86_64 tree
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 21:17:41 -0500
Message-ID: <200612142117.41944.lenb@kernel.org>
References: <20061214153750.b70744ad.akpm@osdl.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:60908 "EHLO hera.kernel.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S964994AbWLOCSU (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 14 Dec 2006 21:18:20 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20061214153750.b70744ad.akpm@osdl.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: "Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org


> The moral here is simple: x86_64 patches go through the x86_64 maintainer.
> Please do not attempt to maintain foreign patches in the acpi tree.

Huh?  What x86_64 patches are in the acpi tree?