Re: [PATCH REPOST 0/5] convert arm platforms to smsc911x

From: Russell King - ARM Linux <redacted>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:31:59 +0000

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 01:15:17PM -0800, David Miller wrote:

quoted

From: Steve.Glendinning@smsc.com
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:53:54 +0000

quoted

Russell King - ARM Linux [off-list ref] wrote on 19/01/2009 
09:22:57:

quoted

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 04:04:34PM +0800, stanley.miao wrote:

quoted

On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 21:53 -0800, David Miller wrote:

quoted

I've applied patches 1 and 2, the smsc911x driver changes.

I can pull the platform changes into net-next-2.6 as well
if people don't think there will enough conflicts to cause
problems.

I think  the platform data had better stay in arm tree.

What would be the impact if patches 3 to 5 got merged before 1 and 2?

It would not break compilation, but it would probably break ethernet 
support
on those three platforms.

That's why I suggested they go where the dependency is for
proper functionality.

Ok, as I see it, the files with the highest chance of conflicting
in this set are the defconfig files.

Therefore, may I suggest that the defconfig updates are split from 3-5
and sent via my tree, the remainder via davem's net-next-2.6 tree?

That works for me.