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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
