[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4638B597.20604@garzik.org>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 12:00:23 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
paulus@...ba.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Rename get_property to of_get_property: drivers/net
Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On May 2, 2007, at 9:17 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
>> Kumar Gala wrote:
>>> On Apr 28, 2007, at 10:47 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>>> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
>>>> Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 11:44:46 +1000
>>>>
>>>>> So can I take this as a future OK for architecture specific network
>>>>> drivers changes to go through the architecture trees (cc'd to you)?
>>>>
>>>> It's been my experience that if I'm just working through some
>>>> platform or bus specific API changes, people like Jeff tend to
>>>> not mind if it goes via ARCH trees and the like.
>>> Is this acceptable? Just want to make sure before I ask Paul to
>>> pull some changes that touches the following drivers:
>>> drivers/net/fs_enet/mac-scc.c | 2 +-
>>> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c | 30 ++++----
>>> drivers/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_cpm1.c | 4 +-
>>> drivers/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_cpm2.c | 4 +-
>>
>> I don't see a patch, just a diffstat.
>
> I haven't sent a patch, just asking the question if I need to break it
> up or not.
Without seeing the patch, I have no idea...
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists