Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, 15 December 2006 22:39, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 13:05:52 -0800
>> Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Jeff, I shall send all the sata patches which I have at you one single time
>>> and I shall then drop the lot.  So please don't flub them.
>>>
>>> I'll then do a rc1-mm2 without them.
>> hm, this is looking like a lot of work for not much gain.  Rafael, are
>> you able to do a quick chop and tell us whether these:
>>
>> pci-move-pci_vdevice-from-libata-to-core.patch
>> pata_cs5530-suspend-resume-support-tweak.patch
>> ata-fix-platform_device_register_simple-error-check.patch
>> initializer-entry-defined-twice-in-pata_rz1000.patch
>> pata_via-suspend-resume-support-fix.patch
>> sata_nv-add-suspend-resume-support.patch
>> libata-simulate-report-luns-for-atapi-devices.patch
>> user-of-the-jiffies-rounding-patch-ata-subsystem.patch
>> libata-fix-oops-with-sparsemem.patch
>> sata_nv-fix-kfree-ordering-in-remove.patch
>> libata-dont-initialize-sg-in-ata_exec_internal-if-dma_none-take-2.patch
>> pci-quirks-fix-the-festering-mess-that-claims-to-handle-ide-quirks-ide-fix.patch
>>
>> are innocent?
> 
> Yes, they are.

We all really appreciate your patience :)  This is good feedback.

To narrow down some more, does applying 2.6.20-rc1 + the attached patch 
work?  (ignoring -mm tree altogether)

The attached patch should /basically/ be the contents of Andrew's 
git-netdev-all patch.

	Jeff