From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Dooks Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3 2.6.24-git] ARM/RPC: Use HAVE_PATA_PLATFORM to select pata platform driver Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:59:23 +0000 Message-ID: <20080211235923.GY18658@trinity.fluff.org> References: <20080202161636.269848721@fluff.org.uk> <20080202161756.505881942@fluff.org.uk> <47A9A0D9.4090308@garzik.org> <20080206124659.GB21027@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from trinity.fluff.org ([89.145.97.151]:54688 "EHLO trinity.fluff.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751883AbYBKX7f (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:59:35 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080206124659.GB21027@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Jeff Garzik , Ben Dooks , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, htejun@gmail.com, Linux ARM Kernel On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 12:46:59PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 06:58:17AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > ACK patch series... would it be ok to send via the ARM maintainer? > > > > I would prefer to add this at the same time as its user... > > I've only seen the one patch, and I suspect that it depends on patches > to other architectures (to convert other architectures to use the new > variable.) Hmm, that is a difficult one. If I send it via RMK, then it assumes that Jeff applies the core patch first and gets his pull request off first. If I send via Jeff, I have to hope RMK doesn't try and modify any of the RPC code (unlikely, these machines have been out of production for a few years now). Even worse, the rest of the patches have to also be applied in order as they remove from the depends line... -- Ben Q: What's a light-year? A: One-third less calories than a regular year.