From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Fri, 24 Oct 2008 22:41:09 +0100 (BST) Received: from h4.dl5rb.org.uk ([81.2.74.4]:21183 "EHLO ditditdahdahdah-dahdahdahditdit.dl5rb.org.uk") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S22318548AbYJXVlB (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Oct 2008 22:41:01 +0100 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by ditditdahdahdah-dahdahdahditdit.dl5rb.org.uk (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m9OLexmJ000674; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 22:40:59 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m9OLewEL000673; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 22:40:58 +0100 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 22:40:58 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Sergei Shtylyov , Atsushi Nemoto , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] TXx9: Add TX4938 ATA support (v2) Message-ID: <20081024214057.GJ25297@linux-mips.org> References: <20081023.011646.51867355.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <200810232206.50973.bzolnier@gmail.com> <4900F8DE.4070203@ru.mvista.com> <200810242252.25327.bzolnier@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200810242252.25327.bzolnier@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 20958 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: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:52:25PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > applied > > > > > > > Hm, I thought that one was for Ralf... > > Ralf ACK-ed the change and was fine with it going through ide tree. > > Anyway it really doesn't matter through whose tree such patches are > going in as long as people are fine with them. > To explain why - there were no ordering constraints but it's always nice if all bits make it to kernel.org in one pull. The arch part was rather minor compared to the IDE part so this should preferably go through the IDE tree. > No need to add some more rigid kernel bureaucracy... Wildy-acked-by: Ralf Baechle :-) Ralf