Re: [PATCH RFC 04/17] staging: dgap: Add in kernel firmware loading support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 02/12/2014 01:41 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:49:46PM -0500, Mark Hounschell wrote:
>> Add in kernel firmware loading support
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Hounschell <markh@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> You also do other things in this patch, like coding style cleanups,
> right?
> 

Yes, and there is a lot more. I just hit the ones right in front of me.

> That's fine for a staging driver, but it makes it hard to review, so you
> should probably break this up into pieces (i.e. one that only does the
> firmare stuff, and one that does the coding style stuff.
> 

Understood.

>>
>> diff -urN linux-3.13.1-orig/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c linux-3.13.1-new/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c
>> --- linux-3.13.1-orig/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c	2014-02-03 13:34:50.489287314 -0500
>> +++ linux-3.13.1-new/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c	2014-02-03 14:12:20.059076489 -0500
>> @@ -18,6 +18,33 @@
>>   *
>>   */
>>  
>> +/*
>> + *      In the original out of kernel Digi dgap driver, firmware
>> + *      loading was done via user land to driver handshaking.
>> + *
>> + *      For cards that support a concentrator (port expander),
>> + *      I believe the concentrator its self told the card which
>> + *      concentrator is actually attached and then that info
>> + *      was used to tell user land which concentrator firmware
>> + *      image was to be downloaded. I think even the BIOS or
>> + *      FEP images required would change with the connection
>> + *      of a particular concentrator. 
>> + *
>> + *      Since I have no access to any of these cards or
>> + *      concentrators, I cannot put the correct concentrator
>> + *      firmware file names into the firmware_info structure
>> + *      as is now done for the BIOS and FEP images. 
> 
> Trailing spaces on these paragraphs, checkpatch.pl should have
> complained about this.
> 

This code is so borked right now checkpatch.pl has MANY complaints. I
figured I would run the 2 files left though the checkfile.pl at a later
date. I think checkfile.pl was what is was called?

Regards
Mark

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux