Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:57:16 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: ata and netdev (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:42:16 -0400 > Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote: > >> (just to provide my indicator of status) > > Thanks. > >>> libata-add-irq_flags-to-struct-pata_platform_info-fix.patch >> are other pata_platform people happy with this? I don't know embedded >> well enough to know if adding this struct member will break things. > > This is just a silly remove-unneeded-cast-of-void* cleanup. I wrote this > as a fixup against > libata-add-irq_flags-to-struct-pata_platform_info.patch with the intention > of folding it into that base patch, but you went and merged the submitter's > original patch so this trivial fixup got stranded in -mm. Feel free to give > it the piss-off-too-trivial treatment.
I'm sorry, I didn't look closely enough. I was referring to the add-irq-flags patch itself, not your small fix.
>>> ata-ahci-alpm-store-interrupt-value.patch >>> ata-ahci-alpm-expose-power-management-policy-option-to-users.patch >>> ata-ahci-alpm-enable-link-power-management-for-ata-drivers.patch >>> ata-ahci-alpm-enable-aggressive-link-power-management-for-ahci-controllers.patch >>> >>> These appear to need some work. >> seemed mostly OK to me. what comments did I miss? > > Oh, I thought these were the patches which affected scsi and which James > had issues with. I guess I got confused.
hrm. ISTR James wanted some cleanups, Kristen did some cleanups, then looking at the cleanups decided they were needed / appropriate at this time.
Anyway, these are in my mbox queue and the libata portions (of which the code is the majority) seem OK. Need to give them a final review.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |