From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESUBMITTED net-next 1/2] IPv6 - support for NLM_F_*
 flags at IPv6 routing requests
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:44:52 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <20111114.004452.1996002974515474262.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <1320919619.17667.0.camel@hakki>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
To: matti.vaittinen@nsn.com
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([198.137.202.13]:44371 "EHLO
	shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750770Ab1KNFpC (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:45:02 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1320919619.17667.0.camel@hakki>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>


The subject lines are completely identical in patches #1 and #2.

How in the world is someone scanning the commit header lines going to
be able to tell what's different about one change vs. the other?

Please correc this and resubmit.