four (big) pcmcia patches for -mm?

[Dominik Brodowski]

OK, I've uploaded four patches which I'd suggest to put into -mm for a while
for proper testing. They are:

http://www.brodo.de/patches/2004-10-28/pcmcia-17-pcmcia_device_model_integration
http://www.brodo.de/patches/2004-10-28/pcmcia-18a-pcmcia_client_t_integration
http://www.brodo.de/patches/2004-10-28/pcmcia-18b-error-on-leftover-devices
http://www.brodo.de/patches/2004-10-28/pcmcia-19-netdevice


pcmcia-17-pcmcia_device_model_integration

is the complete pcmcia-17 patchset, re-diffed, as one patch. Among other
issues, it adds a struct pcmcia_device, and tries to make use of it.

pcmcia-18a-pcmcia_client_t_integration

is the first part of the pcmcia-18 patchset, also re-diffed and updated to
work with the kref changes, also as one patch. It aims at integrating
"client_t" into struct pcmcia_device.

pcmcia-18b-error-on-leftover-devices

is the second and final part of pcmcia-18, also re-diffed and as one patch.
It BUG()s if something went wrong during unbind/removal, i.e. when there are
devices left over after unloading. This shouldn't happen(TM), but you never
know... Also, client_t becomes a part of struct pcmcia_device

pcmcia-19-netdevice

This large patch contains the SET_NETDEV patch originally provided by Adam
Belay and a small cleanup to ds.c which makes it utilize driver_find() 
instead of its own (wrong) implementation. Originally I wanted to merge
Stelian Pop's module_param() and pc_debug work, but that conflicts with
MODULE_PARAM work in -mm so I had to drop it.


I'd suggest that I mail them to Andrew, and mange them if there are bugs
and/or problems (e.g. patch failures), and/or problems with the patches
themselves etc.


On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 11:00:11AM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > Russell, is bk://bk.arm.linux.org.uk/linux-2.6-pcmcia not your latest tree?
> > Is there some other tree I should be using?
> 
> That tree is currently collecting bug fixes, so the more developmental
> stuff isn't moving at the moment.  As I've said, the reason this happens
> is because I only have the one tree at the moment, and throwing this
> stuff in there means I can't push bug fixes - which are higher priority.

... with these four patches handled externally, this doesn't become a
problem.


> Until these extra pcmcia patches are merged into Russell's bk tree I'm not
> confident in just fixing up the rejects and putting your patches into -mm. 
> Because I don't know if there are dependencies there.

All dependancies are handled as long as these patches are applied in order.
If -19 fails because of some conflicts with bk-netdev or something like
that, the others still (should) work.

> I'm easy.  If they're in PCMCIA BK then I get them from there.  Otherwise
> someone can mail them at me and I carry them as standalone patches until
> Russell picks them up.

Andrew, I'll mail them to you if there's agreement on this.

Thanks,
	Dominik
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-pcmcia/attachments/20041028/e7413b28/attachment.bin