Hi,
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 1:28 PM Pan Zhang <zhangpan26@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 18:50 PM Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >Can you add at the beginning of your commit message:
> >From: Pan Zhang <zhangpan26@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >This way we have the commit author that matches the signature, which is a requirement for the kernel.
>
> Firstly, thanks for your reviewing very much. I would fix my signature.
>
> >> drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c
> >> b/drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c index 3cfeb16..368de81 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c
> >> @@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@ static int mt_process_slot(struct mt_device *td, struct input_dev *input,
> >> tool = MT_TOOL_DIAL;
> >> else if (unlikely(!confidence_state)) {
> >> tool = MT_TOOL_PALM;
> >> - if (!active &&
> >> + if (!active && mt
>
> >Ack on the principle, but this doesn't even compile. You are missing a `&&` at the end of the line.
> >
> >Can you send a v2 with the comments above? And we will queue the v2 for 5.5 I think.
>
> Sorry about that. I made a stupid mistake. This patch fixed it.
No worries, mistakes happen.
However, can you resend the patch to the LKML in a separate thread?
Also prefix the patch with "[PATCH v2]". It's easier for our tools to
handle patches when they are send on their own. Because here, I would
have to manually edit either the commit message removing the thread,
either take the first version and edit the patch. It's not so hard for
this kind of simple patches, but it's best to take good habits :)
Cheers,
Benjamin
>
> Signed-off-by: Pan Zhang <zhangpan26@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c b/drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c
> index 3cfeb16..368de81 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-multitouch.c
> @@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@ static int mt_process_slot(struct mt_device *td, struct input_dev *input,
> tool = MT_TOOL_DIAL;
> else if (unlikely(!confidence_state)) {
> tool = MT_TOOL_PALM;
> - if (!active &&
> + if (!active && mt &&
> input_mt_is_active(&mt->slots[slotnum])) {
> /*
> * The non-confidence was reported for
> --
> 2.7.4
>
