Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 18:23 +0100, Marcus Wolf wrote: > Hi everybody! > > Just comparing the master of Gregs statging of pi433 with my local SVN > to review all changes, that were done the last monthes. > > I am not sure, but maybe we imported a bug in rf69.c lines 378 and > following: > >

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

Hi Joe, thank you for your suggestion. The enums are necessary for the (old fashioned) ioctl interface, too. So the user space uses these enums in order to configure the driver. If we want to completely remove rf69_enum.h, we need to find a solution for that, too. From the optics/readability,

Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] media: dt: bindings: Add binding for NVIDIA Tegra Video Decoder Engine

Hi Dmitry, On 10/20/2017 12:34 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > Add binding documentation for the Video Decoder Engine which is found > on NVIDIA Tegra20/30/114/124/132 SoC's. > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/media/nvidia,tegra-vde.txt | 55 >

Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] ARM: tegra: Add device tree node to describe IRAM

Hi Dmitry, On 10/20/2017 12:34 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > From: Vladimir Zapolskiy > > All Tegra SoCs contain 256KiB IRAM, which is used to store CPU resume code > and by hardware engines like a video decoder. > > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy Please add

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] staging: Introduce NVIDIA Tegra video decoder driver

Hi Dmitry, I'll add just a couple of minor comments, in general the code looks very good. On 10/20/2017 12:34 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > NVIDIA Tegra20/30/114/124/132 SoC's have video decoder engine that > supports standard set of video formats like H.264 / MPEG-4 / WMV / VC1. > Currently

Re: [PATCH 02/11] staging: greybus: Remove redundant license text

On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 11:11:30AM +, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > On 07/11/17 13:58, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > index 111501643af2..3e5dedeacd5c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/vibrator.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/vibrator.c > > @@ -4,8 +4,6 @@ > >* > >* Copyright

Re: [PATCH 02/11] staging: greybus: Remove redundant license text

On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 03:31:15PM +, Rui Miguel Silva wrote: > Hi Greg, > On Tue 07 Nov 2017 at 13:58, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > Now that the SPDX tag is in all greybus files, that identifies the > > license in a specific and legally-defined manner. So the

Re: [PATCH 01/11] staging: greybus: add SPDX identifiers to all greybus driver files

On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 02:49:44PM -0700, Mark Greer wrote: > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 02:58:41PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to > > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. > > > > Update the drivers/staging/greybus

Re: [PATCH 01/11] staging: greybus: add SPDX identifiers to all greybus driver files

On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 09:43:01AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 07-11-17, 14:58, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to > > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. > > > > Update the drivers/staging/greybus files files with the

Re: [PATCH 01/11] staging: greybus: add SPDX identifiers to all greybus driver files

On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 04:37:06PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 02:58:41PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to > > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. > > > > Update the drivers/staging/greybus

Re: [PATCH 01/11] staging: greybus: add SPDX identifiers to all greybus driver files

On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 08:51:37PM -0800, David Lin wrote: > On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to > > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. > > > > Update the

Re: [PATCH 02/11] staging: greybus: Remove redundant license text

On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 10:27:40AM +0530, Vaibhav Agarwal wrote: > On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > Now that the SPDX tag is in all greybus files, that identifies the > > license in a specific and legally-defined manner. So the extra GPL

Re: [PATCH 06/11] staging: lustre: add SPDX identifiers to all lustre files

On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 09:00:02PM +, Dilger, Andreas wrote: > On Nov 7, 2017, at 23:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 12:35:43AM +, Dilger, Andreas wrote: > >> On Nov 7, 2017, at 06:58, Greg Kroah-Hartman

Re: [PATCH 9/9] staging: android: Remove redundant license text

On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 11:38:04AM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 11/07/2017 12:07 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > Now that the SPDX tag is in all android files, that identifies the > > license in a specific and legally-defined manner. So the extra GPL text > > wording can be removed as it is

Re: [PATCH 2/9] staging: wilc1000: add SPDX identifiers to all wilc100 files

On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 11:39:14AM +0530, Aditya Shankar wrote: > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 21:07:50 +0100 > Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to > > audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. > > > > Update

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 01:51:10PM +0200, Marcus Wolf wrote: > Hi Greg, > > ok. > > I'll postpone all my work until then. Give me a hook, when I can start :-) I am not going to remember, sorry, I deal with over 1000 patches a week. Just watch kernel.org for when the new kernel is released.

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 11:42:09AM +0200, Marcus Wolf wrote: > But I still need to know when to use staging and when to use linux-next. > I don't want to prepare patches for the wrong tree. Ah, I see now that the confusion is Al's patch. Al is a law unto himself so I don't know the answer.

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

Hi Greg, ok. I'll postpone all my work until then. Give me a hook, when I can start :-) Thanks, Marcus Am 11.11.2017 um 13:49 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 01:42:27PM +0200, Marcus Wolf wrote: Hi Greg, that's fine. Is this the right URL:

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 01:42:27PM +0200, Marcus Wolf wrote: > Hi Greg, > > that's fine. > > Is this the right URL: > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git Yes. > Is there already an aprox. date, when 4.15rc1 will be out and > backintegration will be done? Should

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

Hi Greg, that's fine. Is this the right URL: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git Is there already an aprox. date, when 4.15rc1 will be out and backintegration will be done? Thx, Marcus Am 11.11.2017 um 13:18 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: On Sat, Nov 11, 2017

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 11:42:09AM +0200, Marcus Wolf wrote: > Hi Dan, > > thanks fot the link. I can't remeber, why and what I wanted to redo. Maybe > there was a complaint about the format of the patch... > > In that patch, we also have the topic with the '>> 3', we were discussing a > few

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

Hi Dan, thanks fot the link. I can't remeber, why and what I wanted to redo. Maybe there was a complaint about the format of the patch... In that patch, we also have the topic with the '>> 3', we were discussing a few days ago! I'd suggest, not to invest the history any more. I'm ok with

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 08:55:30AM +0100, Marcus Wolf wrote: > Hi Dan, > > I checked it on my local SVN. You are right. I submitted the code with '&'. > Accodring to a check-in message on my SVN, there was a bugreport end of > July and most probably a patch - either from me, you, Joseph Wright, >

Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 08:55:30AM +0100, Marcus Wolf wrote: > Shortly befor I fell ill, you proposed me to use Gregs staging for my > further development. But Colin yesterday was working on a repo, called > linux-next. > > Can you (or anyone else) please tell me, when (or for which kind of >