From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: pull-request: can-next 2013-08-29
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 21:56:04 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <20130903.215604.852482029571949947.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <521FB992.5080002@pengutronix.de>
	<5224E1A2.1010302@pengutronix.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel@pengutronix.de
To: mkl@pengutronix.de
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:53669 "EHLO
	shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S934276Ab3IDB4F (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 3 Sep 2013 21:56:05 -0400
In-Reply-To: <5224E1A2.1010302@pengutronix.de>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:06:10 +0200

> Hello David,
> 
> On 08/29/2013 11:13 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> this is a pull request for net-next. There are two patches from Gerhard
>> Sittig, which improves the clock handling on mpc5121. Oliver Hartkopp
>> provides a patch that adds a per rule limitation of frame hops.
> 
> have you forgotten this pull request?

If you actually checked the patchwork queue, you're see that this pull
request was still "under review" and there are people who have been
waiting much longer than you have.

I just pulled this in and will push it out once my build tests complete.

There is no reason for you to ever ask me the above question unless
your pull request doesn't show up in patchwork in an appropriate
state.  By default assume I am backlogged and I will get to it
whenever time and my resources allow.