On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 06:30:51AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 02:46:12PM +0100, Samuel Ortiz wrote: > > > You already have a 'struct mei_device', which refers to the PCI device > > > that owns the bus, and has clients attached to it. While it may be > > > a little confusing to people that already worked with the current > > > mei code, I think it would help to rename the existing 'mei_device' > > > to 'mei_host' or something else that feels appropriate, and introduce > > > the new structure as 'mei_device' derived from 'struct device', again > > > matching what most other subsystems do. > > I understand, and I agree it would make sense. As we're aiming at having > > this > > patchset merged during the next merge window, would it be ok to have this > > renaming phase as a follow up patch ? > > Do you mean for 3.9? That's what I meant, yes.
> Sorry, my trees are now closed for new stuff like this for 3.9, Out of curiosity, when do you close your trees for new stuff ? Is there a fixed timeframe ? Cheers, Samuel. -- Intel Open Source Technology Centre http://oss.intel.com/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/