From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mithlesh Thukral Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] NetXen: Make driver use multiple PCI functions Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 11:24:00 +0530 Message-ID: <200704251124.00640.mithlesh@netxen.com> References: <200704201451.l3KEpGsF004449@dut39.unminc.com> <462E45DE.5030702@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, amitkale@netxen.com, netxenproj@linsyssoft.com, rob@netxen.com To: Jeff Garzik Return-path: Received: from svr68.ehostpros.com ([67.15.48.48]:53248 "EHLO svr68.ehostpros.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423212AbXDYGAx (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 02:00:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <462E45DE.5030702@garzik.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 24 April 2007 23:31, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Mithlesh Thukral wrote: > > hi All, > > > > Thanks Stephen for your suggestion. I am resending the 7 patches > > after incorporating the suggestion. > > These patches are with respect to netdev#upstream and we wish their > > inclusion in 2.6.22 kernel. > > > > Out of these the first 2 patches were already accepted into the netdev > > tree, but we have requested them to be dropped. So we are resending those > > 2. Please see the following thread for more details : > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg26805.html > > So what does that mean? > > If the patches were accepted, then you must send further patches > cumulative to what is currently in the tree. If it is already accepted, > you cannot "drop" a patch. My apologies for the confusion created by my email. We wish inclusion of these 7 patches in the netdev tree. All these patches are cumulative with what is currently present in the tree. Thanks, Mithlesh Thukral > > Jeff