[PATCH RESEND 0/4]

[PATCH RESEND 0/4]

[Ivo van Doorn]

Hi John,

These patches have been send during 2006 but never
have been applied or rejected. Even after sending requests
for updates on these patches.
So I have no idea if you had rejected them, simply
overlooked them, or if they are still in your pending list.

Short summary of which patches are being resend:

- crc-itu-t
This has been send to the list during the summer around
the same time as the initial patch for rfkill. It had also been
send to the linux-kernel list with a CC to you with a request
for comment.

- eeprom_93cx6
This has been send to the list1 or 2 months ago. After the
initial patch a feature request for eeprom write support was
made. Those 2 patches have now been merged into a single patch.

Both of the libraries come from rt2x00, and this patch merely
moves them to the location for more generic routines.
Both the crc as the eeprom handling can be used by different
drivers (some drivers also use the same implementation, which
in my opinion would jusitify these 2 modules to be in the lib folder).

Ivo

Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/4]

[Ivo van Doorn]

Hi John,

> These patches have been send during 2006 but never
> have been applied or rejected. Even after sending requests
> for updates on these patches.
> So I have no idea if you had rejected them, simply
> overlooked them, or if they are still in your pending list.
> 
> Short summary of which patches are being resend:
> 
> - crc-itu-t
> This has been send to the list during the summer around
> the same time as the initial patch for rfkill. It had also been
> send to the linux-kernel list with a CC to you with a request
> for comment.
> 
> - eeprom_93cx6
> This has been send to the list1 or 2 months ago. After the
> initial patch a feature request for eeprom write support was
> made. Those 2 patches have now been merged into a single patch.
> 
> Both of the libraries come from rt2x00, and this patch merely
> moves them to the location for more generic routines.
> Both the crc as the eeprom handling can be used by different
> drivers (some drivers also use the same implementation, which
> in my opinion would jusitify these 2 modules to be in the lib folder).

Do you have any status update for these 4 patches?
Are they pending, or have they been rejected?

Thanks,

Ivo