From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the trivial tree with the net tree
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 08:55:16 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <20100205.085516.66180257.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20100204.202645.18974249.davem@davemloft.net>
	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1002050935470.15395@pobox.suse.cz>
	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1002051216460.15395@pobox.suse.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, adam.buchbinder@gmail.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, bhutchings@solarflare.com
To: jkosina@suse.cz
Return-path: <linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1002051216460.15395@pobox.suse.cz>
Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 12:23:06 +0100 (CET)

> Ayway, below is the hunk that I have already dropped from my tree (so that 
> conflict in linux-next is gone), please feel free to apply it to your 
> tree, and let me known whether you want me to reject all furutre patches 

I can't apply it to my tree, that's why we had the conflict
in the first place.

Please submit this to me so that it applies cleanly to net-next-2.6

Thanks.