Re: [PATCH 1/3] ath10k: Get rid of superfluous call to pci_disable_msi()

[Alexander Gordeev]

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:30:44PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> >> Well, as this series is small I thought it could quickly go thru your
> >> tree. But since ipr had conflicts, there is no point routing all patches
> >> altogether, so up to you guys. The wil6210 patch is already in your pci/msi
> >> branch though.
> >
> > It's in pci/msi, but that's not in my -next branch yet, so I can
> > easily drop it.  Do drivers/net/wireless patches normally follow a
> > different path than the other drivers/net patches?  The wil6210 and
> > ath10k patches look just like the others in the 34-patch series (bnx2,
> > bnx2x, tg3, bna, cxgb3, etc.), so I thought it would make more sense
> > to include them there.
> 
> ath10k patches normally go through my ath.git tree to Linville and then
> to David Miller. To avoid conflicts I would prefer to take ath10k
> patches to my tree whenever possible.

CC'ing Vladimir, in case he decides to do the same with wil6210.

> -- 
> Kalle Valo

-- 
Regards,
Alexander Gordeev
agordeev@xxxxxxxxxx
--
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/