Hi Damn, there I was bit too fast :-( Then we use MSR_MASK instead, new patch then. But I will wait a day? Or what is long enough to be sure that nobody else have any objections? How is this usually resolved? Sure, I can send a patch for all the files instead. However, earlier received complaints when I sent patches extending over more than one file. I'll check again how the cover letter works. Although when I try with my send patch mail script it did not work as I wanted. Best regards Rickard Strandqvist 2014-06-08 11:26 GMT+02:00 Peter Wu <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Saturday 07 June 2014 19:01:20 Larry Finger wrote: >> As you have learned here, automatically making changes suggested by some tool >> may convert a visible bug into one that is invisible, and only found by a >> detailed line-by-line examination of the code, and that is unlikely to happen. >> Please be careful. >> >> From everything I see, the test in all drivers should be >> >> if ((bt_msr & MSR_AP) == MSR_AP) > > That only happens to be case because MSR_INFRA | MSR_ADHOC == MSR_AP. This > seems to be the intent: > > #define MSR_MASK 0x03 > if ((bt_msr & MSR_MASK) == MSR_AP) > > In rtl8192se, there are also MSR_LINK_... constants covering MSR_... > and in addition, there is a MSR_LINK_MASK. These macros are quite > redundant though given the other definitions, but the mask is still > nice to have I guess. > > Also, personally I would submit just one patch touching all drivers, but > I see that Rickard has submitted a bunch of patches (without cover letter > either, making it more difficult to group them). What would you prefer, > a single patch touching multiple drivers (as the changes are mostly the > same) or split patches? > > Kind regards, > Peter > -- 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
