From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arend van Spriel Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/27] brcm80211: move under broadcom vendor directory Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 11:36:00 +0100 Message-ID: <5652EC10.9010708@broadcom.com> References: <1447857966-19560-1-git-send-email-kvalo@codeaurora.org> <1447857966-19560-7-git-send-email-kvalo@codeaurora.org> <564CCF2A.4030203@hauke-m.de> <871tbmwhsk.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <564F966A.7080300@broadcom.com> <87lh9qrlra.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <5652EA61.1080103@broadcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Hauke Mehrtens , , , , To: Kalle Valo Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5652EA61.1080103@broadcom.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 11/23/2015 11:28 AM, Arend van Spriel wrote: > On 11/22/2015 06:23 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Arend van Spriel writes: >> >>> On 11/19/2015 08:48 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>>> Hauke Mehrtens writes: >>>> >>>>> On 11/18/2015 03:45 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>>>>> Part of reorganising wireless drivers directory and Kconfig. Note >>>>>> that I had to >>>>>> edit Makefiles from subdirectories to use the new location. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo >>>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> I would prefer to remove the brcm80211 directory in this process >>>>> and create: >>>>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcmfmac >>>>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcmsmac >>>>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcmutil >>>>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/include >>>>> >>>>> This way we have one directory less. >>>> >>>> I think this could be done separately. This patchset is big enough >>>> already, I would not like to make it anymore complicated. >>>> >>>> And I actually like the brcm80211 directory, I would not mind >>>> keeping it >>>> still. >>> >>> I prefer to keep it as brcmsmac and brcmfmac rely on brcmutil module >>> so I want to keep them together under brcm80211. >>> >>> So does this patch go in before or after the patches I submitted >>> before the merge window. I hope after :-p >> >> Sorry, the vendor patches go in first :) It's much safer that way. >> >> But I think that git should be smart enough and your patchset from >> before the merge window should still apply without issues. > > Will see if that is true when I merge it in our internal repo. :-p Just applied the pending patches using 'git am -3' and that works fine. So when told to be smart, git is indeed smart ;-) Regards, Arend