From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] af_iucv patches for linux-2.6.31 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 00:11:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20090619.001103.186026755.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1245329094.14954.38.camel@braunu-laptop> <20090618.111957.70533925.davem@davemloft.net> <20090619090426.19969a0b@skybase> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ubraun@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ursula.braun@de.ibm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com To: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:37456 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751615AbZFSHK7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:10:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090619090426.19969a0b@skybase> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Martin Schwidefsky Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:04:26 +0200 > Hi David, > > On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:19:57 -0700 (PDT) > David Miller wrote: > >> From: Ursula Braun >> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:44:54 +0200 >> >> > sorry, I did a git pull on linux-2.6.git first, and the af_iucv patches >> > applied cleanly on my system. >> >> It couldn't have applied to Linus's tree because all the IUCV >> bits you submitted to me for 2.6.31 are in his tree and that is >> what created the conflicts. > > Now I am confused. I just tested the two patches Uschi sent with todays > upstream tree. The patches apply fine. Where is the problem, wrong tree? Weird, I just retried and they do apply cleanly. I have no idea what happened, sorry. They are in my tree now, thanks.