Hi John,
I'm re-sending my last message below to make sure you receive it, because neither the LMO mailing list archive nor the patchwork shows my following reply. Curious how come the ad spams frequently make themselves show up successfully :-(
My last message:
> That's OK to me.
Deng-Cheng
From: Deng-Cheng Zhu [dengcheng.zhu@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 9:30 AM
To: John Crispin; linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH upstream-sfr] MIPS: APRP: Use the new __wait_event*() interface in RTLX
That's OK to me.
Deng-Cheng
From:
John Crispin
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 11:14PM
To:
Deng-Cheng Zhu,
linux-mips
Subject: Re: [PATCH upstream-sfr] MIPS: APRP: Use the new __wait_event*() interface in RTLX
Hi,
should we fold this fix into 9d4147a783
John
On 16/01/2014 22:36, Deng-Cheng Zhu wrote:
From: Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@xxxxxxxxxx>
The commit 35a2af94c7 (sched/wait: Make the __wait_event*() interface more
friendly) changed __wait_event_interruptible() to use 2 parameters instead
of 3. It also made corresponding changes to rtlx.c. However, these changes
were partially reverted by 9d4147a783 (MIPS: APRP: Code formatting
clean-ups.). This patch fixes it.
Signed-off-by: Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Ralf, this needs to go upstream-sfr/mips-for-linux-next to fix the APRP
build error: macro "__wait_event_interruptible" passed 3 arguments, but
takes just 2
arch/mips/kernel/rtlx.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/rtlx.c b/arch/mips/kernel/rtlx.c
index 4658350..31b1b76 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/rtlx.c
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/rtlx.c
@@ -108,10 +108,9 @@ int rtlx_open(int index, int can_sleep)
p = vpe_get_shared(aprp_cpu_index());
if (p == NULL) {
if (can_sleep) {
- __wait_event_interruptible(
+ ret = __wait_event_interruptible(
channel_wqs[index].lx_queue,
- (p = vpe_get_shared(aprp_cpu_index())),
- ret);
+ (p = vpe_get_shared(aprp_cpu_index())));
if (ret)
goto out_fail;
} else {
