On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 08:29 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> Well, other than the obvious checkpatch.pl warnings waiting to trigger
> ("if" is not a function; put a space before the paren) and what I'd call
> missing parens around the "flags & ...", those are *not* errors. No
> wonder you thought this would cause too many messages!!
Well, I guess I got lazy between patchsets.
> Just make those be dev_dbg() calls instead. The strongest message level
> you can argue for there would be KERN_NOTICE, "normal but significant";
> except it's not especially significant. Filtering by netif_msg_probe()
> may be a good idea too; that's normally enabled in this framework.
I'll use dev_dbg() with netif_msg_probe().
> p.s. Before these get submitted, *all* of them need to pass "checkpatch.pl".
> Ideally, "checkpatch.pl --strict" ...
Ok, I'll remember that now.
I'm not very familiar with posting patches (as some might have noticed)
so I have some questions.. if you don't mind. Now that you have acked
most of the patches, is it ok for me to add your 'Acked-by' to those
patches? Should I even repost all of these patches as patchset or just
ones that have been fixed? Should I post new 'physical medium' patch as
reply to this post and then repost patchset with your ack just to
mailing list?
- Jussi Kivilinna
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
