On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 08:39:06PM +0530, Kumar Gaurav wrote: > On Wednesday 28 August 2013 12:43 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > >On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 07:38:57AM +0530, Kumar Gaurav wrote: > >>This patch redefine function xhci_readl.xhci_readl function doesn't use xhci_hcd argument. > >>Hence there is no need of keeping it in the function arguments. > >> > >>Redefining this function breaks other functions which calls this function. > >>This phatch also correct those calls in xhci driver. > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Kumar Gaurav <kumargauravgupta3@xxxxxxxxx> > >>--- > >Could you put a list of changes since v2 here?: > > > >v3: blah blah changelog mostly. > > > >Also this doesn't apply for me against linux-next. > > > >regards, > >dan carpenter > > > There's no change from v2. I was sending the same patch again > because the last one was lacking good description and i was told (or > as i understood) that if I'm sending the same patch or patch for the > same purpose as previous then i should increment version so i did. Put: v2: no change. just the changelog. Otherwise we have to look for the change. > > I had developed this patch against linux-git, haven't tested that on > linux-next as i haven't cloned linux-next yet. > > I've started cloning linux-next and as it's not applying on > linux-next, I'll try it on linux-next (once i cloned it) and will > send again. Yep. Cleanups should be done against linux-next. regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
