From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: [PULL -tip] fixed few make headers_check warnings Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:40:57 +0100 Message-ID: <20090114154057.GC32082@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <1231836016.3212.41.camel@jaswinder.satnam> <20090113124921.GA30400@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jaswinder Singh Rajput , Alan Cox , Andrew Morton , David Miller , x86 maintainers , LKML , netdev To: Ingo Molnar Return-path: Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.236]:57010 "EHLO pfepb.post.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755535AbZANPjP (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:39:15 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090113124921.GA30400@elte.hu> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 01:49:21PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote: > > > Hello Ingo, > > > > Please pull these patches. Earlier I also floated these patches so that > > I can get some feedback. > > Sam, Andrew, David, what's your workflow preference for these bits? > > While they are oneliners and i could create a separate branch for these > and pull Jaswinder's tree (and do build coverage to make sure there's no > surprised on any arch), it's really up to the maintainers of these files > to decide on the workflow. > > I'd lean towards doing this via the individual maintainers and/or -mm, but > no strong feelings ... As they are one-liners for the most part I am fine with you handling them in a eparate branch. It is far better than I queue them up for at least two weeks before I can give the kernel a bit of attention again. Obviously it would be better if the Maintainers took them but history tells us we cannot rely on that for all areas. Sam