From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from fed1rmmtao09.cox.net (fed1rmmtao09.cox.net [68.230.241.30])
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF17E2BDA1
	for <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>;
	Wed,  6 Oct 2004 01:02:21 +1000 (EST)
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 08:02:19 -0700
From: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
To: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20041005150218.GF32692@smtp.west.cox.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410041110320.13645@dell.enoriver.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410041110320.13645@dell.enoriver.com>
Cc: Embedded PPC Linux list <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: what is the protocol for getting patches into the tree?
List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List
	<linuxppc-embedded.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 11:24:24AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

[snip]
>   what follows is (for ... what ... the third time?), an attempt to 
> just extend the smc_uart struct in commproc.h to add a relocation 
> pointer.  there's no reason i can think of why this shouldn't be 
> applied.

Is this the same patch / idea that I've seen both Wolfgang and Dan have
a number of comments on, or something different?  If it is the same,
have their issues been cleared in this version of the patch?  Thanks.

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/