Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:41:32 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Pat Gefre <pfg@sgi.com>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       hch@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6] Altix updates
Message-ID: <20040116144132.A24555@infradead.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Pat Gefre <pfg@sgi.com>, akpm@osdl.org, davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <200401152154.i0FLscIG023452@fsgi900.americas.sgi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <200401152154.i0FLscIG023452@fsgi900.americas.sgi.com>; from pfg@sgi.com on Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 03:54:37PM -0600
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 969
Lines: 22

On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 03:54:37PM -0600, Pat Gefre wrote:
> 001-reorg.patch
> 002-reorg1.patch

The IS_IOADDR() stuff in the accesor funcs in pcibr_reg.c is completly
bogus, please decide whether you want to pass a pointer to the pcibr_soft
or bridge_t to it instead of doing second-guessing.

Also while the pic.h changes look okay they will conflict with a patch
I'm about to send that adds common headers for the bridge/xbow/xwidget
register for mips and IA64.  Can you send me a version of pic.h with
those changes and the big endian ifdefs back in so I can just incorporate
the new version into my patch?

Also are all those access you abstract away different in TIOCP?  If not
please don't add the wrappers for them.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/