On 11/26/2012 04:54 PM, John W. Linville wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 09:32:19PM +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote: > >> When Seth posted his rework on brcmsmac transmit, we had a number of >> patches ready in the same area albeit less rigorous. With Seth's patches >> lined up in wireless-next for 3.8, I am wondering what to do here. >> Should I send our patches against the wireless tree? These patches will >> definitely result in conflicts when merging to wireless-next, which you >> typically do. Actually, we do not want these patches in wireless-next as >> rework from Seth makes them irrelevant. >> >> Any advice on this? > > If they are fixes, then they should be small and obvious -- hopefully > that makes the merging relatively easy? You might try applying > them to a local wireless tree and pulling that into a local copy of > wireless-next, then resolving the conflicts locally so that you can > give me some idea of any tricky merges? > > John > Hi John, I did already (re)submit the one 3.7 patch to you fixing a slab corruption. As the code is reworked pretty significantly (removing packets queues) in 3.8, I have a similar patch for 3.8 that I intend to submit soon. So merge of the 3.7 patch can be ignored for wireless-next. Gr. AvS -- 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
