From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Ungerer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: add support for NS8390 based eth controllers on some ColdFire boards Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 12:55:38 +1000 Message-ID: <4FEA762A.4070301@snapgear.com> References: <1340587792-8596-1-git-send-email-gerg@snapgear.com> <1340587792-8596-2-git-send-email-gerg@snapgear.com> <4FE945CA.6060509@snapgear.com> <4FE98777.4090600@snapgear.com> <4FE98B7D.4040506@snapgear.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from dnvwsmailout1.mcafee.com ([161.69.31.173]:56900 "EHLO DNVWSMAILOUT1.mcafee.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750865Ab2F0Czw (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:55:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, uclinux-dev@uclinux.org Hi Geert, On 06/26/2012 09:03 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Greg Ungerer wrote: >> On 06/26/2012 08:03 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Greg Ungerer wrote: >>>> On 06/26/2012 05:47 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:16 AM, Greg Ungerer >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 06/25/2012 05:59 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 3:29 AM, wrote: >>>>>>>> arch/m68k/include/asm/mcfne.h 129 +--------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mcf8390.h? >>>>>>> mcfne.h is queued for removal. >>>>>> >>>>>> I was trying to save it :-) >>>>>> Do you think I should just silently move the modified mcfne.h >>>>>> to a mcf8390.h? >>>>> >>>>> Sure. Why not? >>>> >>>> We lose any git history linking the original and new file. >>> >>> Your commit renaming-and-modifying it will provide the link? >> >> I would normally do that with a "git mv". But isn't that going to >> clash with your "git rm"? Or am I mis-understanding what you mean? > > It may indeed give a merge conflict. > > If the conflict is too complicated (we'll see in -next), I can remove its > scheduled deletion. My concern here is that I expect that patch will go through DaveM's netdev tree. And he may get a little annoyed when a merge conflict arises in Linux next. Given that at this point we have the chance to resolve it. I will just create a new mcf8390.h if you want to keep the removal that is already staged. Keep everyone happy :-) Regards Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: gerg@snapgear.com SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888 8 Gardner Close, FAX: +61 7 3891 3630 Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com