From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: plagnioj@jcrosoft.com (Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 21:08:22 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: at91: AT91CAP9 has a macb device In-Reply-To: <20110419184050.GP31131@pengutronix.de> References: <1303201280-25413-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <20110419154941.GC19199@game.jcrosoft.org> <20110419184050.GP31131@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: <20110419190822.GC4204@game.jcrosoft.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 20:40 Tue 19 Apr , Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 05:49:41PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > On 10:21 Tue 19 Apr , Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote: > > > commit > > > > > > ee621dd (net: atmel_macb Kconfig: remove long dependency line) > > > > > > replaced a list of several explicit machines in the dependencies of MACB by > > > a single symbol that is selected by the respective machines. ee621dd missed > > > to let ARCH_AT91CAP9 select HAVE_NET_MACB though which is fixed here. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-K?nig > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD > I don't understand why you reply with a S-o-b. Does that mean you took > the patch somehow? If not, I think an Ack would be more appropriate. > With path should this patch go? Patch system? I'll put it via our own tree and send the pull request end of the week with other fix Best Regards, J.