From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S966306AbbJ1OC2 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:02:28 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:35753 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S965755AbbJ1OC0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:02:26 -0400
X-Greylist: delayed 361 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:02:26 EDT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] net: dsa: allow switch drivers to cleanup their
 resources
To: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>
References: <562F8ED7.2000804@baylibre.com> <562F9AAB.8090202@gmail.com>
 <562F9BB1.8090700@baylibre.com> <20151027165932.GA21799@ketchup.mtl.sfl>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>, Fabian Frederick <fabf@skynet.be>,
        Pavel Nakonechny <pavel.nakonechny@skitlab.ru>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frode Isaksen <fisaksen@baylibre.com>
From: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>
Organization: Baylibre
Message-ID: <5630D402.8010006@baylibre.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:56:18 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20151027165932.GA21799@ketchup.mtl.sfl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 10/27/2015 05:59 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> On Oct. Tuesday 27 (44) 04:43 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I didn't know how to handle this since it was part of a larger patch.
>>
>> I forgot to add this into the cover-letter but I wanted to send an RFC serie with
>> your bcm remove patch and a mv88e6xxx remove experimental code.
>>
>> Yet, the mv88e6060 does not make usage of this.
> 
> So this patch must be part of your RFC for module removal instead of
> this patchset.
> 
> Thanks,
> -v
> 

Vivien, Florian,

Thanks for the review, I will integrate it in the other RFC patchset with the correct Signed-off-by tag.

Neil