From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Slaby Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tty tree Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:13:01 +0100 Message-ID: <5149D1FD.90400@suse.cz> References: <20130320144233.10125800E4@viridian.itc.virginia.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130320144233.10125800E4@viridian.itc.virginia.edu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bill Pemberton Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Greg KH , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On 03/20/2013 03:42 PM, Bill Pemberton wrote: > Ok, for the unopened ports there *should* never be any actual data to > push so the push is really doing nothing anyhow in these cases. It's > coming from the device sending an initial change port command. > > Anyhow, so my patch adding more is_open logic can be dropped and then > yours will apply fine. What's the best way for me to handle this? > Send a revert for my patch so yours will apply or send an updated > version of your patch that removes my additions? Asking Greg to revert should suffice. I commented on that patch, but in a different thread, so Greg missed the comment the patch is not needed IIRC. What was the title of the patch, I cannot find it immediately :/? -- js suse labs