From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765597AbXFRSot (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:44:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763034AbXFRSol (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:44:41 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:58988 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760861AbXFRSok (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:44:40 -0400 Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:44:36 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Dan Williams Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , johannes@sipsolutions.net, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: libertas (private) ioctls vs. nl80211 Message-ID: <20070618184436.GC17479@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Dan Williams , Andrew Morton , johannes@sipsolutions.net, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds References: <1181757483.29767.99.camel@johannes.berg> <20070614170901.GA13384@infradead.org> <20070614103836.23b07a72.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070614181307.GA16856@infradead.org> <1182188327.22149.5.camel@xo-28-0B-88.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1182188327.22149.5.camel@xo-28-0B-88.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:38:47PM -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 19:13 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > I suspect that the probability of your proposal succeeding would be increased > > > if you could prepare a patch... > > Applied to upstream-fixes branch of libertas-2.6 which is destined for > 2.6.22; I hope you don't mind that I just added the Signed-off-by for > you. Adding a signed off line for a patch that purely removes codes seems rather pointless to me, but feel free to add it if you care.