> So are you going to resend this as a non-RFC patch so that I can apply
> it? :)
Yep, apologies for the delay.
Was hoping to get my test setup up and going, but some Errata with
that version of the dev board have complicated access to the SDIO port.
I'll prepare a proper patch and get it sent
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:46:25PM -0600, Jason Litzinger wrote:
> The patch with this RFC addresses the following sparse warnings:
So are you going to resend this as a non-RFC patch so that I can apply
it? :)
thanks,
greg k-h
___
devel mailing list
This seems nice, yes.
regards,
dan carpenter
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:54:16PM -0600, Jason Litzinger wrote:
> > + strStaParams.ht_capa = *params->ht_capa;
> Doh, that's completely wrong. I had a few iterations of this and sent
No, it wasn't. The PATCH RFC I sent initally is correct. Apologies, had a
C brain gap and
> + strStaParams.ht_capa = *params->ht_capa;
Doh, that's completely wrong. I had a few iterations of this and sent
the wrong version. There's an embedded array in that struct (not an
embedded struct as I though during one read through).
Will fix and re-send, sorry for the
The patch with this RFC addresses the following sparse warnings:
drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c:2006:51: warning: incorrect
type in assignment (different base types)
drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c:2006:51:expected unsigned
short [unsigned] [assigned]
