From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757377Ab3CTPUR (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:20:17 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f45.google.com ([74.125.83.45]:42458 "EHLO mail-ee0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751370Ab3CTPUP (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:20:15 -0400 Message-ID: <5149D1FD.90400@suse.cz> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:13:01 +0100 From: Jiri Slaby User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:19.0) Gecko/20130124 Thunderbird/19.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Pemberton CC: Stephen Rothwell , Greg KH , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tty tree References: <20130320144233.10125800E4@viridian.itc.virginia.edu> In-Reply-To: <20130320144233.10125800E4@viridian.itc.virginia.edu> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/20/2013 03:42 PM, Bill Pemberton wrote: > Ok, for the unopened ports there *should* never be any actual data to > push so the push is really doing nothing anyhow in these cases. It's > coming from the device sending an initial change port command. > > Anyhow, so my patch adding more is_open logic can be dropped and then > yours will apply fine. What's the best way for me to handle this? > Send a revert for my patch so yours will apply or send an updated > version of your patch that removes my additions? Asking Greg to revert should suffice. I commented on that patch, but in a different thread, so Greg missed the comment the patch is not needed IIRC. What was the title of the patch, I cannot find it immediately :/? -- js suse labs