On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:19:06 +0200 André Schwarz andre.schwarz@matrix-vision.de wrote:
-#define _IO_BASE 0x00000000
the above is the reason for the below:
ok - understood. Didn't expect your patch being applied that quickly, i.e. obviously missed all ACK's.
WD hasn't applied it yet - I applied it to my local tree. None of this means your patch should touch the same line and thus cause unnecessary conflicts.
So did you want 1-3/3 of these to bypass u-boot-mpc83xx and go straight to WD? I'm asking because there's overlap with the mpc5xxx maintainer (WD himself apparently) in this patchseries.
Will wait for all replies. As far as I know WD is on vacation, i.e. this is going to take some time. I'm in no hurry - if it's ok for you I'll fix all remaining issues with a single rebase/resend.
sure, go ahead - I guess we have to wait for WD to pick them up. I'll try and ack them before he gets back.
Kim