From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756384AbZETJMc (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2009 05:12:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754126AbZETJMZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2009 05:12:25 -0400 Received: from d112a2.x-mailer.de ([212.162.53.4]:39655 "EHLO d112a2.x-mailer.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753971AbZETJMZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2009 05:12:25 -0400 From: Karsten Keil Organization: B1-systems To: Marcel Holtmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/19] Add XHFC support for embedded Speech-Design board to hfcmulti Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 11:12:21 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.1 (Linux/2.6.27.21-0.1-default; KDE/4.2.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: David Miller , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, i4ldeveloper@listserv.isdn4linux.de References: <20090519.121116.52530205.davem@davemloft.net> <1242789181.3147.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1242789181.3147.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200905201112.22062.keil@b1-systems.de> X-Info: valid message X-Info: original Date Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Marcel, Hi Dave, On Mittwoch, 20. Mai 2009 05:13:01 Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Karsten, > > > I have been applying some gigaset patches into the net-next-2.6 > > and I would therefore suggest that you push ISDN changes bound > > for the next kernel release via the networking tree as well. > > > > In fact I'm very surprised that you're not at least CC:'ing > > netdev@vger.kernel.org with these patches. Not only would they get > > review for networking specific issues they would also get your patches > > tracked automatically at: My idea was to not send it on too much lists, but I think you are right, netdev@vger.kernel.org should be used here and since it should go via the net tree it should be the default. > > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/ > > > > Can you at least state how you intend to manage the ISDN changes you > > queue up? Are you going to submit them independantly and straight to > > Linus or are you going to play along and get them in via my > > net-next-2.6 tree in order to avoid all of the merge hassles? > > since mISDN uses AF_ISDN and sockets, I personally would prefer if they > go via net-2.6 and net-next-2.6 trees. This makes it a lot simpler in > case of merge conflicts during the merge windows. > Yes, you are right, I queued it for linux-next because I was remembering that somebody did suggest this in the past, but this was not really a good idea. I will setup a new merge tree based on net-2.6-next (or better net-2.6) ? Karsten