From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 11/13] time sync: generic infrastructure to map between time stamps generated by a clock source and system time Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 17:28:10 +0100 Message-ID: <491B041A.9040808@cosmosbay.com> References: <1226415447.31699.10.camel@ecld0pohly> <4919B03E.1050504@linux.intel.com> <1226476898.31699.37.camel@ecld0pohly> <20081112.020834.114661119.davem@davemloft.net> <1226506470.31699.81.camel@ecld0pohly> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick Ohly Return-path: Received: from gw1.cosmosbay.com ([86.65.150.130]:41357 "EHLO gw1.cosmosbay.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750763AbYKLQ2S convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:28:18 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1226506470.31699.81.camel@ecld0pohly> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Patrick Ohly a =E9crit : > On Wed, 2008-11-12 at 10:08 +0000, David Miller wrote: >> From: Patrick Ohly >> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:01:38 +0100 >> >>> Anyway, I'll try to keep this in mind, but would prefer to not refo= rmat >>> the patches unless I have to touch them for other reasons. >> That distracts the eyes of the people reviewing the code, because >> such people spend most of their time reading code that conforms >> to the proper kernel coding style. >=20 > You are right of course. I have changed this and also addressed the > other comments. I'll give it a few more days in case that there are > further comments, then resubmit with linux-kernel on CC. >=20 > Should I rebase against net-2.6 or net-next-2.6? >=20 net-next-2.6 is the tree you want to use for new network developments net-2.6 is for bug fixes only