On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 10:41:36AM +0200, Ivajlo Dimitrov wrote: > > On 06.12.2013 17:10, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 08:05:38AM +0200, Ivajlo Dimitrov wrote: > >> Hi Greg, > >> > >> On 01.12.2013 19:07, Ivaylo DImitrov wrote: > >>> From: Ivaylo Dimitrov <freemangordon@xxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Custom uuid helper function is needed only in rmgr/dbdcd.c and doesn't > >>> need to be exported. It can also be made way simpler by using sscanf. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Ivaylo Dimitrov <freemangordon@xxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/staging/tidspbridge/Makefile | 2 +- > >>> drivers/staging/tidspbridge/gen/uuidutil.c | 85 -------------------- > >>> .../tidspbridge/include/dspbridge/uuidutil.h | 18 ---- > >>> drivers/staging/tidspbridge/rmgr/dbdcd.c | 42 +++++++++- > >>> 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 108 deletions(-) > >>> delete mode 100644 drivers/staging/tidspbridge/gen/uuidutil.c > >>> > >> I guess the initial mail somehow didn't make it through your spam filter: > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/1/70 > > It did, but I thought that people asked for it to be changed in the > > thread afterwards, so I was expecting an updated version from you. > > > > Care to fix things up and resend it? > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > Sure, the change I was asked for is trivial, but I didn't get the reason > why it is needed. Neither there is a reply to my follow-up comment [0]. > Sorry, I am pretty much new on LKML and could miss things that are > supposed to be clear from the start, but my impression is that when > someone says "it is better", he/she should explain why it is better or > at least what is wrong with the patch he/she wants to be changed. > > However, I don't want to enter some arguing loop, so if you think I > should change the code as per Joe's comment, just confirm it and I'll do it. Please try. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
