From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: Yet more fixes to etherh.c Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 11:46:01 +0000 Message-ID: <20090222114601.GD28025@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20090222081947.GF16596@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090222.002414.146849186.davem@davemloft.net> <20090222084558.GH16596@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090222.023933.207642182.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@vyatta.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:47624 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751487AbZBVLqQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:46:16 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090222.023933.207642182.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 02:39:33AM -0800, David Miller wrote: > From: Russell King - ARM Linux > Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 08:45:58 +0000 > > > On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 12:24:14AM -0800, David Miller wrote: > > > From: Russell King - ARM Linux > > > Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 08:19:47 +0000 > > > > > > > Hmm, I don't see the problem. What's currently in mainline is: > > > > > > > > .ndo_set_mac_address = eth_mac_addr, > > > > > > Which didn't go in via the net-2.6 tree, sigh... :-/ > > > > > > Russell, pick your transport medium, either send ARM network driver > > > fixes via me or straight to Linus. > > > > > > Not some mixture of both, that's only going to lead to confusion, > > > just like it did here. > > > > > > I put that "eth_mac_addr" fix into net-next-2.6, and you then sent it > > > straight to Linus. > > > > Hmm, so someone else submitted the same fix for that regression caused > > by fe96aaa. > > That someone else was you: > > commit 5376071069ec8a7e6a8112beab16fc24f5139475 > ... > Merge master.kernel.org:/home/rmk/linux-2.6-arm > > * master.kernel.org:/home/rmk/linux-2.6-arm: (22 commits) > > which brought in: > > commit a71558d0eca1bbb23737f832297926666f9b36db > Author: Russell King > Date: Tue Jan 27 22:32:29 2009 +0000 > > [ARM] etherh: continue fixing build failure > > Further to 483a2b3a3182abcb7fcea986d7ea13e793bb00b1, also fix: > > drivers/net/arm/etherh.c:649: error: 'eth_set_mac_addr' undeclared here (not in a function) > > Signed-off-by: Russell King > > This was my entire point. Yes, I know I put that into mainline via my tree... > > Given that the eth_mac_addr change is a regression fix, the question has > > to be asked: why is it queued for the next merge window? > > Because I thought the regression only existed in net-next-2.6, > probably due to poor communication from the patch submitter :) > > > In any case, I'm more than willing to push this through the ARM tree, but > > at the same time I'm aware that people get upset if they're not copied on > > the patches. That's why I CC'd you with it. > > All you need to do is explicitly tell me where a bug fix goes, > and I can get it into Linus's tree in less than a day. > > It's all about communication and not doing things like submitting > changes behind my back after I've explicitly replied with an > email saying "Applied" to your patch. ... but I must have forgotten that I'd already sent it to you. I don't seem to have a record of sending it. What I do have is that I raised the issue of the ndo_set_mac_addr in January on netdev. To that I got a reply from Stephen about it, to which I asked whether he wanted me to fix it via my tree. The response I got in private was "yes" (and I won't reveal the rest of it because it refers to his travel around that time.) In reply to that I sent Stephen a patch, which being a reply to a private message couldn't be CC'd back to netdev. However, coincidentally, it seems that you fixed the precise error I raised (thanks) but missed the eth_set_mac_addr mis-spelling, so I dropped my original patch. I didn't get any further response from on the issue, so I'd assumed two weeks later that it was dead and fixed the remaining issue. So, as far as I can see, I never sent you a patch for to fix the eth_set_mac_addr -> eth_mac_addr change. If you have that in your tree, someone else must have sent it to you (maybe Stephen forwarded it?)