Re: [PATCH 1/3] ath10k: Get rid of superfluous call to pci_disable_msi()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> Well, as this series is small I thought it could quickly go thru your
>> tree. But since ipr had conflicts, there is no point routing all patches
>> altogether, so up to you guys. The wil6210 patch is already in your pci/msi
>> branch though.
>
> It's in pci/msi, but that's not in my -next branch yet, so I can
> easily drop it.  Do drivers/net/wireless patches normally follow a
> different path than the other drivers/net patches?  The wil6210 and
> ath10k patches look just like the others in the 34-patch series (bnx2,
> bnx2x, tg3, bna, cxgb3, etc.), so I thought it would make more sense
> to include them there.

ath10k patches normally go through my ath.git tree to Linville and then
to David Miller. To avoid conflicts I would prefer to take ath10k
patches to my tree whenever possible.

-- 
Kalle Valo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux USB]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Greybus]

  Powered by Linux