From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:40:37 +0100 (BST) Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:17595 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20029218AbXI1Sk1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:40:27 +0100 Received: from imap1.linux-foundation.org (imap1.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.55]) by smtp2.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id l8SIdk3K031761 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:39:47 -0700 Received: from box (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by imap1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with SMTP id l8SIdjF8012016; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:39:45 -0700 Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:39:45 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: Jeff Garzik , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sb1250-mac: Driver model & phylib update Message-Id: <20070928113945.389a6a70.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20070921124409.7f3d122b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070924095559.c81f7061.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MIMEDefang-Filter: lf$Revision: 1.185 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 207.189.120.14 Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 16731 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: akpm@linux-foundation.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:23:00 +0100 (BST) "Maciej W. Rozycki" wrote: > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > Well, this is against Jeff's netdev-2.6 tree which hopefully is not as > > > crufty as Linus's old mainline; if it is not possible to queue this change > > > for 2.6.25 or suchlike, then I will try to resubmit later. > > > > Most of Jeff's netdev tree got dumped into Dave's net-2.6.24 tree. That's > > the one you want to be raising patches against for the next few weeks. > > OK, thanks for clarification. Then both patches already submitted: > > patch-netdev-2.6.23-rc6-20070920-sb1250-mac-typedef-9 > patch-netdev-2.6.23-rc6-20070920-sb1250-mac-29 > > apply cleanly to net-2.6.24 one on top of the other in this order. hm, I found a patch at the end of an email trail which is datestamped Sep 20 here which appears to match the first one you mentioned, but I'm having trouble working out what patch subject your "sb1250-mac" maps onto. This is why I make the patch filenames map directly from the patch titles, so I end up with files like optimize-x86-page-faults-like-all-other-achitectures-and-kill-notifier-cruft.patch. Verbose, but it reduces confusion and mistakes. > I can resubmit them That's always a good choice. Patches which are dangling at the end of an email discussion often don't get merged: it is unclear to the receiveing party that the discussion has terminated, and I'm never terribly confident in the testing level of a patch which obviously got modified two minutes before it was sent. > -- where? netdev? As I say I am fine with 2.6.25 as > the target. jeff, netdev, me?