From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sunset.davemloft.net (unknown [74.93.104.97]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7054DDE721 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:18:32 +1100 (EST) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:18:33 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20090108.111833.163761985.davem@davemloft.net> To: timur@freescale.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] ucc_geth: use correct UCCE macros From: David Miller In-Reply-To: References: <1231359172-6119-1-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, leoli@freescale.com, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: "Timur Tabi" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 14:17:04 -0600 > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Timur Tabi wrote: > > > This patch will break ucc_geth.c if my other patch, "powerpc: add Ethernet > > UPSMR definitions to QE library" isn't also applied. That patch is currently > > in Kumar's 'next' branch, so it will make 2.6.29-rc0. Therefore, it should > > be safe to apply this patch to 'net-next' today, with the understanding that > > everything will be peachy once Linus pulls everyone's 2.6.29 branches. > > David, > > as I mentioned here, Kumar already has the pre-req patch in his 'next' > branch (for 2.6.29), so if you apply this patch to your 'next', > ucc_geth.c will break until Linus pulls from Kumar and you pull from > Linus. I think that's OK. I think I'll wait for Kumar's stuff to hit Linus's tree, then apply this patch. The patch is safely stored in my inbox and patchwork so there is no need to fear it getting lost :-)