Sure! Philippe withdrew his R-b on 7/8, as I explained 7/8 is fine (only need to remove a bad comment) the problem was in the tests 8/8 - should I include the original R/b?
I guess all other 1-6 are fine to add R/b... On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 6:07 PM John Snow <js...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 10/16/19 10:55 AM, Sam Eiderman wrote: > > Thanks for the detailed comment Laszlo, > > > > Indeed my e-mail has changed and I only received replies to the > > commits where I added this new mail in the S-o-b section, should of > > added in all of them. > > > > So as you said it, the problem was actually in using qfw_cfg_get_u32 > > which assumes the value is encoded LE and has an additional > > le32_to_cpu, should have used qfw_cfg_get directly like > > qfw_cfg_get_file does. > > > > Regarding qfw_cfg_get_file - I wrote this code when this function did > > not exist yet, I think it was added 6 months ago. In any case, I will > > use it instead. > > > > Thanks for this. > > > > I will resubmit this entire commit series: > > * I will only change code in the last commit (tests) > > * I will remove a comment which is now not true anymore > > * I will add my new email in S-o-b > > > > Sam > > > > Philippe gave me a verbal tut-tut for not including his review tags in > my last pull request; when you re-spin could you be so kind as to > include any that still apply? > > --js
