Hi Sarah,
Thanks for your clear explanation. :)
I will resend the patch.
Best Regards,
Edward
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Sarah Sharp
<sarah.a.sharp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Edward,
>
> Can you resend as a clean patch? The patch itself looks good, just the
> formating is a little off. Comments are inlined.
>
> Git will take this top part as the commit message for your patch:
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 01:42:35AM +0800, Edward Shao wrote:
>> Dear Sergei,
>>
>> I update my patch.
>> Thanks for your review.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Edward
>>
>> ---
>
> and ignore this part, which is the important bit:
>
>> According "5.3.6 Capability Parameters (HCCPARAMS)" of xHCI rev0.96 spec,
>> value of xECP register indicates a relative offset, in 32-bit words,
>> from Base to the beginning of the first extended capability.
>> The wrong calculation will cause BIOS handoff fail (not handoff from BIOS)
>> in some platform with BIOS USB legacy sup support.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Edward Shao <laface.tw@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>
> You can add any extra text that you want git to ignore here, after the
> dashed line, before the file diffs. So your message to Sergei should
> have gone here. :)
>
>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h | 7 +++++--
>> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h
>> index ecc131c..78c4eda 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h
>> @@ -101,12 +101,15 @@ static inline int xhci_find_next_cap_offset(void
>> __iomem *base, int ext_offset)
>>
>> next = readl(base + ext_offset);
>>
>> - if (ext_offset == XHCI_HCC_PARAMS_OFFSET)
>> + if (ext_offset == XHCI_HCC_PARAMS_OFFSET) {
>> /* Find the first extended capability */
>> next = XHCI_HCC_EXT_CAPS(next);
>> - else
>> + ext_offset = 0;
>> + } else {
>> /* Find the next extended capability */
>> next = XHCI_EXT_CAPS_NEXT(next);
>> + }
>> +
>> if (!next)
>> return 0;
>> /*
>> --
>> 1.6.6
>
> I think git will ignore this extra text after the version number, but
> it's best to leave it off. People can find the old patch in the mailing
> list archives.
>
> Sarah Sharp
>
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Hello.
>> >
>> > Edward Shao wrote:
>> >
>> >> According "5.3.6 Capability Parameters (HCCPARAMS)" of xHCI rev0.96 spec,
>> >> value of xECP register indicates a relative offset, in 32-bit words,
>> >> from Base to the beginning of the first extended capability.
>> >> The wrong calculation will cause BIOS handoff fail (not handoff from BIOS)
>> >> in some platform with BIOS USB legacy sup support.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Edward Shao <laface.tw@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> ---
>> >> drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h | 4 +++-
>> >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h
>> >> b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h
>> >> index ecc131c..073583f 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h
>> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-ext-caps.h
>> >> @@ -101,9 +101,11 @@ static inline int xhci_find_next_cap_offset(void
>> >> __iomem *base, int ext_offset)
>> >>
>> >> next = readl(base + ext_offset);
>> >>
>> >> - if (ext_offset == XHCI_HCC_PARAMS_OFFSET)
>> >> + if (ext_offset == XHCI_HCC_PARAMS_OFFSET) {
>> >> /* Find the first extended capability */
>> >> next = XHCI_HCC_EXT_CAPS(next);
>> >> + ext_offset = 0;
>> >> + }
>> >> else
>> >>
>> >
>> > } and *else* should be on the same line. Also, you should add {} to the
>> > *else* branch according to Documentation/CodingStyle...
>> >
>> > WBR, Sergei
>> >
>> >
>
--
Best Regards,
Edward
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
