Re: [PATCH 15/61] net: struct device - replace bus_id with dev_name(), dev_set_name()

[Kay Sievers]

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 07:29, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:26:19 -0700
>
>> From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Cc: davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxxx>
>
> None of this patch applies to net-next-2.6
>
> Probably because, just like the wimax case, these changes
> are already there.

Yeah, I think -next handles duplicate and completely indentical
patches from differnt trees just fine, so that all has been in -next
for a while, and while it was still in Greg's tree when the other tree
merged it.

This patch is in your -next tree:
  http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next-2.6.git;a=commit;h=db1d7bf70f42124f73675fca62fe32f3ab1111b4

The problem with -next is that if some tree is dropped because of a
non-trivial conflict, and Greg removes merged patches, later patches
in Greg's tree may fail because of missing changes. Maybe we need some
kind of annotation with the -next logic to handle such cases better?

Thanks,
Kay
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/