From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:41:30 +1000 Message-ID: <1215834090.7549.149.camel@pasglop> References: <20080707230717.10429faf.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <200807112101.25704.bzolnier@gmail.com> Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:46630 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756631AbYGLDro (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:47:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200807112101.25704.bzolnier@gmail.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Paul Mackerras , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Walker , Andrew Morton On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 21:01 +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > Since I haven't heard back from Ben [1] on ide-pmac/media-bay IRQ issue > I took another look at ide-pmac patches and I think that it should be > possible to rework them in such way that consecutive ide patches (> 100) > won't depend on "ide-pmac: media-bay support fixes (take 4)" patch. > > This would allow us to re-schedule it to 2.6.28 (which is probably what > we want because 2.6.26 is probably just around the corner and we will be > pretty busy with 2.6.27 merge window soon). Ben, what's your opinion? > > [1] which doesn't surprise me given his new responsibilities ;) That and I just moved house... been hectic lately. I'll give another shot at the IRQ issues early next week, and if it still doesn't work, we'll postpone. Cheers, Ben.