Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:33509 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753059Ab1HRHwB (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 03:52:01 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add uevent to bcma bus, to autoload drivers. From: David Woodhouse To: =?UTF-8?Q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?= Cc: wireless , b43-dev , Larry Finger Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 08:51:36 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <4E3420E9.6080603@lwfinger.net> <1313617419.3990.134.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <1313653897.13224.4.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> (sfid-20110818_095206_353158_0A3AA1D1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 08:46 +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > > Tested on my BCM43224, thanks a lot! :) > > Acked-by: Rafał Miłecki > > You didn't send this directly to John, not sure if he will pick it up. > > Do you think this should go for 3.1? With this patch ppl will directly > see interface is present and will just use it or see error about > firmware in dmesg. Without the patch, person just have to know b43 is > supposed to support his card. Yes, it should go in for 3.1. I wasn't really expecting John to pick it up. You are the maintainer of drivers/bcma, so I'd expect to send it to *you*. Many maintainers would be unhappy at patches being sent upstream and bypassing them. Normally I'd expect you to pick up the patch and add it to your tree/queue with your own signed-off-by, and for it to go upstream that way. Of course, I'm happy to send it on directly if that's what you prefer. -- dwmw2