On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 04:39:45PM +0800, Zhengwang Ruan wrote: > GCC warns 'buffer' and 'buffer_size' are used with being uninitialized, and > 'buffer' is used as returned value, and 'buffer_size' is initialized using > uninitialized_var to clear warning. > If you wanted to use the uninitialized_var() macro for a pointer, the trick is: struct binder_buffer *uninitialized_var(buffer); But this is fine as is. The subject should have a subsystem prefix. You'll need to resend both patches for that reason. (You had them correct in the original version you sent to kj). The subjects could also say [patch 1/2] and [patch 2/2] but it doesn't matter since the line numbers didn't change and they can be applied in any order. Don't forget to CC Greg. He reads the list as well, but you should always CC a maintainer and a list for each patch. Anyway, it looks good. Just fix the subjects and resend. When you resend a patch it should say [patch 1/2 v2] in the subject and below the signed off by line put: --- v2: added a subsystem prefix to the subject Sorry that it's a lot of nit picky work. We have to push as much work as we can on to patch submitters so that maintainers can apply things with a click of the mouse. After a while you'll learn all the rules. :) regards, dan carpenter
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
