On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 14:34 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > "incvalue" variable holds a result of "er32(TIMINCA) & > E1000_TIMINCA_INCVALUE_MASK" > and used in "do_div(temp, incvalue)" as a divisor. > > Thus, "u64 incvalue" declaration is probably a mistake. > Even though it seems to be a harmless one, let's fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]> > CC: Jeff Kirsher <[email protected]> > CC: Jesse Brandeburg <[email protected]> > CC: Shannon Nelson <[email protected]> > CC: Carolyn Wyborny <[email protected]> > CC: Don Skidmore <[email protected]> > CC: Bruce Allan <[email protected]> > CC: John Ronciak <[email protected]> > CC: Mitch Williams <[email protected]> > CC: David S. Miller <[email protected]> > CC: LKML <[email protected]> > CC: [email protected] > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
First of all, trimmed down the recipient list since almost all of the reviewers you added have nothing to do with e1000e. Any chance you can send this to the "correct" list intel-wired- [email protected]? Kind of amazing that your shotgun blast approach in emailing out the patch series managed to miss sending it to the one email list that handles Intel Wired LAN kernel patches.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
