On 11/10/2010 5:56 PM, Hari Kanigeri wrote:
Benoit,
Thanks for your comments.
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Cousson, Benoit<b-cousson@xxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Hari,
On 11/10/2010 1:45 PM, Hari Kanigeri wrote:
Thanks to Rene Sapiens and Omar Ramirez for their inputs on initial patch
set.
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg37278.html
The patch set addresses the following review comments from Rene and Omar.
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg37626.html
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/255091/
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/255081/
Following patches are changed because of above review comments:
omap:mailbox-send message in process context
omap:mailbox-add notification support for multiple readers
Following patch is dropped from initial patch set
omap:mailbox-resolve multiple receiver problem
The patch set is tested on omap4 SDP board.
Fernando Guzman Lugo (1):
mailbox: change full flag per mailbox queue instead of global
Hari Kanigeri (5):
omap:mailbox: fix rx interrupt disable in omap4
omap:mailbox-fix checkpatch warnings
That one is weird? How can you submit a patch that fix checkpatch?
Why weird if the patch is fixing the checkpatch warnings that were
already present in the code ?
OK, so you meant that this is fixing some already existing warnings in
mainline code?
My point was that checkpatch is supposed to check patch... but it's true
that is can check the code as well. I was assuming that all the code in
mainline is supposed to be already checkpatch proof :-)
It seems that this is not the case.
It might be interesting to run it on every plat-omap / mach-omap files...
Thanks,
Benoit
The other option is to leave the checkpatch warnings in the code :)
In theory you should not send any patch that generate checkpatch error or
warning.
omap:mailbox-send message in process context
omap:mailbox-add notification support for multiple readers
omap:clocks44x-add dummy clock for mailbox
We are trying to enforce some consistency in the subjects name so you should
name your patches like that:
Good point, thanks for pointing about consistency. I wasn't aware
about the rule to use OMAP in caps.
I will fix it.
Thank you,
Best regards,
Hari
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
