Re: PATCH: Address lots of pending pm_message_t changes

[Nigel Cunningham]

Hi.

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 09:04, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > Andrew, if you get one big patch doing only type-safety (u32 ->
> > > >  pm_message_t, no code changes), would you still take it this late? I
> > > >  promise it is not going to break anything... It would help merge after
> > > >  2.6.11 quite a lot...
> > > 
> > > Problem is, such a megapatch causes grief for all those people who maintain
> > > their own trees.  It would be best, please, to split it into 10-20 bits and
> > > send the USB parts to Greg and the SCSI bits to James, etc.
> > 
> > Okay; I can do that if everyone is happy with the thing as a whole.
> > Andrew, can I get your answer on Pavel's question - shall I just include
> > the u32->pm_message_t part?
> 
> Yes, I believe it is too late to do anything than u32->pm_message_t
> conversion that changes no code...

I guess I'm wrong then - I thought the other changes avoided compilation
errors.

Regards,

Nigel
-- 
Nigel Cunningham
Software Engineer, Canberra, Australia
http://www.cyclades.com

Ph: +61 (2) 6292 8028      Mob: +61 (417) 100 574

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/