On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 08:24:08PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 11:43:51PM +0530, Faizel K B wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Faizel K B <faizel.kb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tools/usb/testusb.c | 14 ++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/usb/testusb.c b/tools/usb/testusb.c
> > index ee8208b2f946..69c3ead25313 100644
> > --- a/tools/usb/testusb.c
> > +++ b/tools/usb/testusb.c
> > @@ -265,12 +265,6 @@ static int find_testdev(const char *name, const struct stat *sb, int flag)
> > }
> >
> > entry->ifnum = ifnum;
> > -
> > - /* FIXME update USBDEVFS_CONNECTINFO so it tells about high speed etc */
> > -
> > - fprintf(stderr, "%s speed\t%s\t%u\n",
> > - speed(entry->speed), entry->name, entry->ifnum);
> > -
> > entry->next = testdevs;
> > testdevs = entry;
> > return 0;
> > @@ -299,6 +293,14 @@ static void *handle_testdev (void *arg)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > + status = ioctl(fd, USBDEVFS_GET_SPEED, NULL);
> > + if (status < 0)
> > + fprintf(stderr, "USBDEVFS_GET_SPEED failed %d\n", status);
> > + else
> > + dev->speed = status;
> > + fprintf(stderr, "%s speed\t%s\t%u\n",
> > + speed(dev->speed), dev->name, dev->ifnum);
> > +
> > restart:
> > for (i = 0; i < TEST_CASES; i++) {
> > if (dev->test != -1 && dev->test != i)
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him
> a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond
> to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
> writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
> created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
> in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
> kernel tree.
>
> You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
> as indicated below:
>
> - You did not specify a description of why the patch is needed, or
> possibly, any description at all, in the email body. Please read the
> section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what is needed in order to
> properly describe the change.
>
> - This looks like a new version of a previously submitted patch, but you
> did not list below the --- line any changes from the previous version.
> Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
> kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what needs to be done
> here to properly describe this.
>
> If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
> how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
> Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
> from other developers.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h's patch email bot
Is it expected to be a separate patch (version 2)? Since the change is
only in the updated 'real name' for the 'from' field and 'Signed Off' field
in response with the previous message from the bot.
