On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:39 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: "John W. Linville" <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:14:19 -0400 > >> This is another batch of updates intended for 3.5... > ... >> Please let me know if there are problems! > > There are: > > From 792545c7bc5d6b922d3778dc602e557d64c83551 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:55:48 -0700 > Subject: [PATCH 88/88] libertas: include sched.h on firmware.c > > Do not assume we have our subsystem including this for us, > at least for older kernels this is not true. Lets just be > explicit about this requirement for the usage of wake_up(). > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > This is bogus, wake_up() is defined in linux/wait.h, the whole > point of the linux/sched.h split up is so that linux/sched.h > includes could be removed and replaced with actual dependencies. > > Also, please don't accept any patches from Luis that add those > #undef pr_fmt things to the atheros drivers. > > He tried to add it an ethernet driver, and I asked him to explain > exactly why he's doing and that if it's appropriate then it's > appropriate everywhere not just in a few specific drivers. He failed > to respond to me, and therefore failed to explain the situation and > address my concerned. And then I saw just today that he's submitting > the same patch to wireless drivers. That's not acceptable. Sorry about that, I missed your reply, will dig it up and reply. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
