[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B025812.6060807@hartkopp.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:00:18 +0100
From: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@...tkopp.net>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>,
Christian Pellegrin <chripell@...e.org>,
Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
Anant Gole <anantgole@...com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net tree with the net-current
tree
Hello Stephen,
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the net tree got a conflict in
> drivers/net/can/Kconfig between commit
> b93cf3f0bb45560d2ce62bdcc2181c40660cfdbf ("can: Fix driver Kconfig
> structure") from the net-current tree
Indeed this cleanup was made in net-2.6 to fix the Kconfig structure before
2.6.32 is finalized.
The commits
> 3758bf25db8caeec667e4e56e030da0ec3060529 ("can: add TI CAN (HECC)
> driver"), e0000163e30eeb112b41486ea113fd54f64e1f17 ("can: Driver for the
> Microchip MCP251x SPI CAN controllers") and
> afa17a500a3667f66df450100538d06769529bba ("net/can: add driver for mscan
> family & mpc52xx_mscan") from the net tree.
added Kconfig entries right behind the CAN_AT91 driver - and that's because
the net-2.6 patch "can: Fix driver Kconfig structure" refuses to apply cleanly
on net-next-2.6 ...
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix for a while. (I am not
> sure the fix is entirely correct.)
>
Yes. You only added the new Kconfig entries (for CAN_TI_HECC, CAN_MCP251X,
CAN_MSCAN, ...) to the patch "can: Fix driver Kconfig structure", right?
These are the only added items in drivers/net/can/Kconfig from net-2.6 to
net-next-2.6.
Thanks,
Oliver
--
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