From: nicolas.ferre@atmel.com (Nicolas Ferre)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [GIT PULL] net/at91: at91_ether fixes for 3.4-rc
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:07:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F991E6D.4020303@atmel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120426.052006.1832921763623188173.davem@davemloft.net>
On 04/26/2012 11:20 AM, David Miller :
> From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:14:56 +0200
>
>> Can you please pull those fixes for 3.4-rc? The ARM/AT91 part
>> of modifications is pretty small and bounded to a single SoC so
>> it will not mess with arm-soc git tree.
>
> Please post the patches themselves to netdev.
>
> You can give me pull requests, but those go into the "[PATCH 0/N] ..."
> email, it doesn't preclude you're still having to post the actual
> patches.
>
> Otherwise nobody can review your work.
Both patches have been posted on netdev (but independently):
First has been posted on February 13th:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg188868.html
With a question from myself a few days ago:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg196183.html
And I can find ancestors back in May 2011...
Second one has been posted on April 23rd:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg196002.html
So, should I repost both of them as patch series?
Best regards,
--
Nicolas Ferre
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <avictor.za@gmail.com>,
<plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] net/at91: at91_ether fixes for 3.4-rc
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:07:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F991E6D.4020303@atmel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120426.052006.1832921763623188173.davem@davemloft.net>
On 04/26/2012 11:20 AM, David Miller :
> From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:14:56 +0200
>
>> Can you please pull those fixes for 3.4-rc? The ARM/AT91 part
>> of modifications is pretty small and bounded to a single SoC so
>> it will not mess with arm-soc git tree.
>
> Please post the patches themselves to netdev.
>
> You can give me pull requests, but those go into the "[PATCH 0/N] ..."
> email, it doesn't preclude you're still having to post the actual
> patches.
>
> Otherwise nobody can review your work.
Both patches have been posted on netdev (but independently):
First has been posted on February 13th:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg188868.html
With a question from myself a few days ago:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg196183.html
And I can find ancestors back in May 2011...
Second one has been posted on April 23rd:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg196002.html
So, should I repost both of them as patch series?
Best regards,
--
Nicolas Ferre
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, avictor.za@gmail.com,
plagnioj@jcrosoft.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] net/at91: at91_ether fixes for 3.4-rc
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:07:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F991E6D.4020303@atmel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120426.052006.1832921763623188173.davem@davemloft.net>
On 04/26/2012 11:20 AM, David Miller :
> From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:14:56 +0200
>
>> Can you please pull those fixes for 3.4-rc? The ARM/AT91 part
>> of modifications is pretty small and bounded to a single SoC so
>> it will not mess with arm-soc git tree.
>
> Please post the patches themselves to netdev.
>
> You can give me pull requests, but those go into the "[PATCH 0/N] ..."
> email, it doesn't preclude you're still having to post the actual
> patches.
>
> Otherwise nobody can review your work.
Both patches have been posted on netdev (but independently):
First has been posted on February 13th:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg188868.html
With a question from myself a few days ago:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg196183.html
And I can find ancestors back in May 2011...
Second one has been posted on April 23rd:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg196002.html
So, should I repost both of them as patch series?
Best regards,
--
Nicolas Ferre
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-26 10:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-26 9:14 [GIT PULL] net/at91: at91_ether fixes for 3.4-rc Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-26 9:14 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-26 9:14 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-26 9:20 ` David Miller
2012-04-26 9:20 ` David Miller
2012-04-26 10:07 ` Nicolas Ferre [this message]
2012-04-26 10:07 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-26 10:07 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-26 10:12 ` David Miller
2012-04-26 10:12 ` David Miller
2012-04-26 10:12 ` David Miller
2012-04-26 10:31 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-26 10:31 ` Nicolas Ferre
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F991E6D.4020303@atmel.com \
--to=nicolas.ferre@atmel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.