Hi, > Thanks for your comment. My intention was having a logical seperation to > enable better discussion of my patch, which I think is pretty much of a > monster and not yet ready for inclusion? I've seen larger patches ;) But ok. > What do you think about my selection of mesh_path_sel_ops and the > storing of mesh PP/PM/CC id? > > If you deem it OK I would be happy to reformat the patch (into three or > so seperatly compiling patches) and include KConfigs. Well, you really need to run checkpatch and address (most of) its complaints. Then you can repost and I'll take a look again. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
