The driver is reporting a warning at kernel/time/timer.c:1096 due to calling
del_timer_sync() while in interrupt mode. Such warnings are fixed by calling
del_timer() instead.
Signed-off-by: Larry Finger larry.fin...@lwfinger.net
Cc: Stable sta...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Haggi Eran
On 05/15/2015 09:22 PM, Tolga Ceylan wrote:
visorchipset_file_init() and visorchipset_file_cleanup() functions
do not seem to be used from anywhere else and now are declared
as static. Sparse emitted not declared warnings for these two
functions.
Signed-off-by: Tolga Ceylan
On 05/12/2015 08:55 PM, Tolga Ceylan wrote:
Error code returned from auth_parse() should in cpu byte order.
Signed-off-by: Tolga Ceylan tolga.cey...@gmail.com
---
drivers/staging/rtl8192u/ieee80211/ieee80211_softmac.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
Many lines of code extend beyond the maximum line length.
Some of these are possibly justified by use type.
For instance:
structure definitions where comments are added per member like
struct foo {
type member;/* some long description */
}
And lines that don't fit the
On 2014-12-07 20:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 06:14:42PM +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 09:06:29PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 04:38:16AM +, parths...@laer.in wrote:
On 2014-12-06 17:51, Greg Kroah-Hartman
On Fri, 22 May 2015, Joe Perches wrote:
Many lines of code extend beyond the maximum line length.
Some of these are possibly justified by use type.
For instance:
structure definitions where comments are added per member like
struct foo {
type member;/* some long
Ah - that explains it. I added additional files to the series, but
simply re-applied the original round of patches. They would've not
been tagged as v4, while the patches pertaining to the newly-modified
files had v4 in the subject.
I'll be more thorough in future patch revisions. Thanks for
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 08:09:54AM -0400, Michael Shuey wrote:
BTW, you keep mentioning a v5 that I sent. Where is that, exactly?
The last round of patches I sent I've kept labeled as PATCH v4, and
I only hit git send-email once. Could you forward me something from
this v5 series, so I could
Hm, that's unfortunate - but my own fault for lack of proper
etiquette. I'll give this a week or two to settle, and build up
patches against other parts of lustre in the meantime.
BTW, you keep mentioning a v5 that I sent. Where is that, exactly?
The last round of patches I sent I've kept
We would have applied the v3 patchset but now I don't know because we're
up to v5. We can't apply v5 because there are problems with it. No
one responded to v3 so Greg still might apply it or he might find these
email threads too scrambled and delete everything and ask for a resend.
It's pretty
On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 13:32 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015, Joe Perches wrote:
Many lines of code extend beyond the maximum line length.
Some of these are possibly justified by use type.
For instance:
structure definitions where comments are added per member like
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 11:13:31AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 21:07 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
No one uses the complicated options on checkpatch anyway, they just grep
away the warnings they don't like.
That'd be false. Other projects like u-boot do.
Ah. Ok.
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:04:30AM +0200, Josef Holzmayr wrote:
Howdy!
I’m currently working on a platform_driver, where I want an
attribute_group to be in effect for every platforn_device that went
through the corresponding .probe() call. Now
I feel like the lustre headers could be fit into 80 characters without
losing very much.
No one uses the complicated options on checkpatch anyway, they just grep
away the warnings they don't like. Newbies especially don't use them.
regards,
dan carpenter
14 matches
Mail list logo
