On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 08:44:27AM -0400, nick wrote:
> I am attaching two check patch patches I wrote in the last few days as I am unable to get a reply
> from the maintainers. Would someone please send them off for me.
> Thanks,
> Nick
> >From 7bf4229fa2f9c4fcf3243bc738c74bfdc58a6594 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Nicholas Krause <xerofoify@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 11:53:24 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] staging wlan-ng: Add missing a blank line after declarations
>
> Fixing trivial checkpatch warnings about missing line after
> declarations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Krause <xerofoify@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Tested by compilation only.
> drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> index 1f2c78c..20d146b 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> @@ -1376,6 +1376,7 @@ int hfa384x_drvr_setconfig(hfa384x_t *hw, u16 rid, void *buf, u16 len);
> static inline int hfa384x_drvr_getconfig16(hfa384x_t *hw, u16 rid, void *val)
> {
> int result = 0;
> +
> result = hfa384x_drvr_getconfig(hw, rid, val, sizeof(u16));
> if (result == 0)
> *((u16 *) val) = le16_to_cpu(*((u16 *) val));
> @@ -1385,6 +1386,7 @@ static inline int hfa384x_drvr_getconfig16(hfa384x_t *hw, u16 rid, void *val)
> static inline int hfa384x_drvr_setconfig16(hfa384x_t *hw, u16 rid, u16 val)
> {
> u16 value = cpu_to_le16(val);
> +
> return hfa384x_drvr_setconfig(hw, rid, &value, sizeof(value));
> }
> @@ -1402,6 +1404,7 @@ static inline int
> hfa384x_drvr_setconfig16_async(hfa384x_t *hw, u16 rid, u16 val)
> {
> u16 value = cpu_to_le16(val);
> +
> return hfa384x_drvr_setconfig_async(hw, rid, &value, sizeof(value),
> NULL, NULL);
> }
> 1.9.1
>
> >From 5eb3de22f0760ece1e838d48c8dd9148b4331cdc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Nicholas Krause <xerofoify@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 17:07:24 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] staging netlogic: Fix checkpatch errors in xlr_net.c
>
> This removes the checkpatch errors related to a needed line below
> declaration of a struct and another about a non nessary printk
> message about a NULL allocated skb due to the function returning
> NULL to the caller of the function and the printk no longer being'
> used or needed by any callers.
>
spelling mistakes
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Krause <xerofoify@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/netlogic/xlr_net.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/netlogic/xlr_net.c b/drivers/staging/netlogic/xlr_net.c
> index 9bf407d..28a42831 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/netlogic/xlr_net.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/netlogic/xlr_net.c
> @@ -142,10 +142,8 @@ static inline struct sk_buff *xlr_alloc_skb(void)
>
> /* skb->data is cache aligned */
> skb = alloc_skb(XLR_RX_BUF_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
> - if (!skb) {
> - pr_err("SKB allocation failed\n");
why the error message was removed ?
> + if (!skb)
> return NULL;
> - }
> mac_put_skb_back_ptr(skb);
> return skb;
> }
> @@ -1104,6 +1102,7 @@ err_gmac:
> static int xlr_net_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct xlr_net_priv *priv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> unregister_netdev(priv->ndev);
> mdiobus_unregister(priv->mii_bus);
> mdiobus_free(priv->mii_bus);
> --
> 1.9.1
>
ohhh .. yeah .. and both the patch failed when i tried to apply them to next-20140916
why are we wasting our time for your patches , which are bound to have some problem ????
thanks
sudip
> _______________________________________________
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
