Hi, On Sat, Feb 04 2012, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > Thanks. Actually, it recently occurred to me, that patches 3 and 10 should > actually be merged into one. So, if you like, I can produce a v3 with that > taken into account. The result would be exactly the same, I literally > would just apply #10 on top of #3 and commit the result with the same > commit description as the v2 of #3.
Sure. > Shall I also rebase v3 on top of mmx-next and fix the failing patch? The > two ARM patches can be applied separately, but they have to go in after > this series then. Either way is ok with me, pulling all via mmc has the > advantage of not having to synchronise the pulls, but then the conflict > probability rises of course. I'm happy to take the ARM patches, but I'll need ACKs from the relevant arch maintainers to do that. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball <c...@laptop.org> <http://printf.net/> One Laptop Per Child -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
