On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 03:18:13PM +0100, Michael Büsch wrote: > On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 11:42 +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 05:11:58PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > > > @@ -175,9 +124,9 @@ static int retu_wdt_release(struct inode > > > struct retu_wdt_dev *wdev = file->private_data; > > > > > > #ifndef CONFIG_WATCHDOG_NOWAYOUT > > > - retu_wdt_ping_enable(retu_wdt); > > > + retu_wdt_ping_enable(wdev); > > > #endif > > > - clear_bit(0, &retu_wdt->users); > > > + clear_bit(0, &wdev->users); > > > > this hunk isn't part of this patch. > > Well, it's a compiler warning cleanup, so I thought it would be fine > to go with the big cleanup patch. > Is it necessary to do a separate patch for this? I think so, yes. It'll keep the history nice and clean. -- balbi -- 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
