[PATCH 1/?] Unlock when sn_oemdata can't be extended

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
Unlock when sn_oemdata can't be extended Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/mca.c b/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/mca.c index 3db62f2..868c9aa 100644 --- a/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/mca.c +++ b/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/mca.c @@ -98,6

[PATCH] Fix unlocking before return in gpio

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
Fix unlocking before return in gpio Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c b/arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c index f389ed6..0d347a7 100644 --- a/arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c +++ b/arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c @@

[PATCH] Unlock when ssp tries to close an invalid port

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
Unlock when ssp tries to close an invalid port Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c index 71766ac..422afee 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c @@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ void ssp_exit(

Re: [PATCH] unlock 12c_mutex before return

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
. -- Move check before lock Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c index 18e0b16..f3ff813 100644 --- a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c +++ b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c @@ -79,12 +79,12 @@

Re: [PATCH] unlock 12c_mutex before return

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
Andreas Schwab wrote: -if (num 2) +if (num 2) { +mutex_unlock(d-i2c_mutex); return -EINVAL; How about moving the check before the lock? Good suggestion. Patch below covers both previous patches. -- Move check before lock Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin

[PATCH] Unlock when ssp tries to close an invalid port

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
Unlock when ssp tries to close an invalid port Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c index 71766ac..422afee 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c @@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ void ssp_exit(struct

[PATCH] Fix unlocking before return in gpio

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
Fix unlocking before return in gpio Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c b/arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c index f389ed6..0d347a7 100644 --- a/arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c +++ b/arch/cris/arch-v10/drivers/gpio.c @@ -297,8

[PATCH 1/?] Unlock when sn_oemdata can't be extended

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
Unlock when sn_oemdata can't be extended Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/mca.c b/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/mca.c index 3db62f2..868c9aa 100644 --- a/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/mca.c +++ b/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/mca.c @@ -98,6 +98,7

[PATCH 2/2] Fix unlock on error

2007-10-23 Thread Roel Kluin
Fix unlock on error Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/irixsig.c b/arch/mips/kernel/irixsig.c index a0a9105..a6e6e78 100644 --- a/arch/mips/kernel/irixsig.c +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/irixsig.c @@ -426,6 +426,7 @@ asmlinkage int irix_sigprocmask(int

Re: [PATCH] several returns before unlocking in lmc_ioctl

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
I think we should keep the lmc_tracing. Use this patch instead. -- Several returns before unlocking in lmc_ioctl Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c b/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c index 5ea8772..64eb578 100644 --- a/d

[PATCH] Unlock before return in p9_mux_poll_start

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
commit 9f822afc65cc094c905901f9d92bf25042f9ed22 Author: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue Oct 23 03:15:55 2007 +0200 Unlock before return in p9_mux_poll_start Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff --git a/net/9p/mux.c b/net/9p/mux.c index f140

[PATCH] Unlock in iTCO_wdt_start when reboot is disabled

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
commit 61c31efe4e9c34531666a6c5857ecd19c8db Author: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue Oct 23 03:08:27 2007 +0200 Unlock in iTCO_wdt_start when reboot is disabled Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c b/driv

[PATCH] several returns before unlocking in lmc_ioctl

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Several returns before unlocking in lmc_ioctl Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c b/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c index 5ea8772..af7b3e4 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c +++ b/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_

Re: [PATCH] unlock 12c_mutex before return

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
And a similar one in drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/gl861.c -- unlock 12c_mutex before return -EINVAL Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/gl861.c b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/gl861.c index f01d99c..20c340a 100644 --- a/drivers/med

[PATCH] unlock 12c_mutex before return

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
unlock 12c_mutex before return -EINVAL Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c index 18e0b16..31f47c7 100644 --- a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c +++ b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/

Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Rene Herman wrote: > On 10/22/2007 02:40 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote: > >> NAK. This will cause double-unlock when CONFIG_BUG is disabled. It's >> incorrect to assume that BUG() will always terminate the current >> process. > > (which by the way also means that the "return;" delete from your >

Re: [PATCH retry] return hidden bug and unlock bugs

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Roel Kluin wrote: > This patches shouldn't alter behavior when CONFIG_BUG is disabled. It is meant > as a replacement for the previous patches. > > Concerning the patch changing fs/buffer.c, I am still wondering whether > "page_cache_release(page)" should be place

Re: [PATCH] return hidden bug

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Ray Lee wrote: >>> I'm sorry, perhaps I poured myself a cup of stupid this morning, but >>> isn't the above patch effectively introducing a BUG where none could >>> be reached before? In other words, for the patch to have zero >>> behavioral change, wouldn't it have to remove the BUG()

Re: [PATCH] return hidden bug

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Ray Lee wrote: > I'm sorry, perhaps I poured myself a cup of stupid this morning, but > isn't the above patch effectively introducing a BUG where none could > be reached before? In other words, for the patch to have zero > behavioral change, wouldn't it have to remove the BUG() altogether? True,

[PATCH retry] return hidden bug and unlock bugs

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
before BUG(), but don't change behavior in the case when CONFIG_BUG is disabled Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c b/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c index e1c4707..6a69425 100644 --- a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c +++ b/a

Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
ome cases where it was attempted to free after BUG(). should that occur before BUG() as well? -- Unlock before BUG() Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c index 88629a3..679c8b4 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi

Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
that occur before BUG() as well? -- Unlock before BUG() Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c index 88629a3..679c8b4 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c @@ -100,8 +100,10 @@ static ssize_t

[PATCH retry] return hidden bug and unlock bugs

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
(), but don't change behavior in the case when CONFIG_BUG is disabled Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c b/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c index e1c4707..6a69425 100644 --- a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c +++ b/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c

Re: [PATCH] return hidden bug

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Ray Lee wrote: I'm sorry, perhaps I poured myself a cup of stupid this morning, but isn't the above patch effectively introducing a BUG where none could be reached before? In other words, for the patch to have zero behavioral change, wouldn't it have to remove the BUG() altogether? True, but

Re: [PATCH] return hidden bug

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Ray Lee wrote: I'm sorry, perhaps I poured myself a cup of stupid this morning, but isn't the above patch effectively introducing a BUG where none could be reached before? In other words, for the patch to have zero behavioral change, wouldn't it have to remove the BUG() altogether? True, but

Re: [PATCH retry] return hidden bug and unlock bugs

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Roel Kluin wrote: This patches shouldn't alter behavior when CONFIG_BUG is disabled. It is meant as a replacement for the previous patches. Concerning the patch changing fs/buffer.c, I am still wondering whether page_cache_release(page) should be placed before or after the BUG

Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Rene Herman wrote: On 10/22/2007 02:40 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote: NAK. This will cause double-unlock when CONFIG_BUG is disabled. It's incorrect to assume that BUG() will always terminate the current process. (which by the way also means that the return; delete from your original patch

[PATCH] unlock 12c_mutex before return

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
unlock 12c_mutex before return -EINVAL Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c index 18e0b16..31f47c7 100644 --- a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c +++ b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/au6610.c

Re: [PATCH] unlock 12c_mutex before return

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
And a similar one in drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/gl861.c -- unlock 12c_mutex before return -EINVAL Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/gl861.c b/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/gl861.c index f01d99c..20c340a 100644 --- a/drivers/media/dvb

[PATCH] several returns before unlocking in lmc_ioctl

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
Several returns before unlocking in lmc_ioctl Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c b/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c index 5ea8772..af7b3e4 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c +++ b/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c @@ -142,9

[PATCH] Unlock in iTCO_wdt_start when reboot is disabled

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
commit 61c31efe4e9c34531666a6c5857ecd19c8db Author: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue Oct 23 03:08:27 2007 +0200 Unlock in iTCO_wdt_start when reboot is disabled Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog

[PATCH] Unlock before return in p9_mux_poll_start

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
commit 9f822afc65cc094c905901f9d92bf25042f9ed22 Author: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue Oct 23 03:15:55 2007 +0200 Unlock before return in p9_mux_poll_start Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] diff --git a/net/9p/mux.c b/net/9p/mux.c index f140147..c9f0805 100644

Re: [PATCH] several returns before unlocking in lmc_ioctl

2007-10-22 Thread Roel Kluin
I think we should keep the lmc_tracing. Use this patch instead. -- Several returns before unlocking in lmc_ioctl Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c b/drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c index 5ea8772..64eb578 100644 --- a/drivers

Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
Roel Kluin wrote: > unlock before bug returns > if (cs >= GPMC_CS_NUM || !gpmc_cs_reserved(cs)) { > printk(KERN_ERR "Trying to free non-reserved GPMC CS%d\n", cs); > - BUG(); > spin_unlock(_mem_lock); > -

[PATCH] unlock before bug returns

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
I think the unlock should be before bugging? -- unlock before bug returns Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c index 5a4cc20..c910170 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach

Re: [PATCH] return hidden bug

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
Rik van Riel wrote: > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 03:05:05 +0200 > Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> return hidden bug >> >> Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> diff --git a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c >&g

[PATCH] return hidden bug

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
return hidden bug Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff --git a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c b/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c index e1c4707..6a69425 100644 --- a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c +++ b/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c @@ -365,8 +365,8 @@ pci_unmap_single(

Re: [PATCH] errors with assignments in if

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
Roel Kluin wrote: > I am not entirely certain about the third one: > > from fs/udf/udf_sb.h: > > #define UDF_SB_VAT(X) ( UDF_SB(X)->s_vat ) > > if it's the desired behavior then I think this should at least be changed to > > UDF

[PATCH] errors with assignments in if

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
ors with assignments in ifs Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c index d9af436..e6e85b7 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c @@ -651,7 +651,7 @@ static u32 omap2_get_c

[PATCH] errors with assignments in if

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
with assignments in ifs Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c index d9af436..e6e85b7 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c @@ -651,7 +651,7 @@ static u32 omap2_get_clksel(u32

Re: [PATCH] errors with assignments in if

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
Roel Kluin wrote: I am not entirely certain about the third one: from fs/udf/udf_sb.h: #define UDF_SB_VAT(X) ( UDF_SB(X)-s_vat ) if it's the desired behavior then I think this should at least be changed to UDF_SB_VAT(sb) = udf_iget(sb, ino); if (!(UDF_SB_VAT

[PATCH] return hidden bug

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
return hidden bug Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] diff --git a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c b/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c index e1c4707..6a69425 100644 --- a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c +++ b/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c @@ -365,8 +365,8 @@ pci_unmap_single(struct

Re: [PATCH] return hidden bug

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
Rik van Riel wrote: On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 03:05:05 +0200 Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: return hidden bug Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] diff --git a/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c b/arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c index e1c4707..6a69425 100644 --- a/arch/alpha

[PATCH] unlock before bug returns

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
I think the unlock should be before bugging? -- unlock before bug returns Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c index 5a4cc20..c910170 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2

Re: [PATCH] unlock before bug returns

2007-10-21 Thread Roel Kluin
Roel Kluin wrote: unlock before bug returns if (cs = GPMC_CS_NUM || !gpmc_cs_reserved(cs)) { printk(KERN_ERR Trying to free non-reserved GPMC CS%d\n, cs); - BUG(); spin_unlock(gpmc_mem_lock); - return; + BUG

Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

2007-10-19 Thread Roel Kluin
Gregory Haskins wrote: > We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not. > > Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- > > 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) I think you wanted a patch here? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the

Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

2007-10-19 Thread Roel Kluin
Gregory Haskins wrote: We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not. Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) I think you wanted a patch here? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-18 Thread Roel Kluin
previously applied changes removed and changed as suggested. Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c b/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c index 7dce318..752ae26 100644 --- a/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c +++ b/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c @@ -322,7

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-18 Thread Roel Kluin
Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 03:46:43PM +0200, Roel Kluin wrote: >> +++ b/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c >> @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ static void write_status(acpi_handle handle, int out, >> int mask) >> >> switch (mask) { >> case ML

[PATCH 4/4 returns] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-18 Thread Roel Kluin
Thanks for comments, here a second version with previously covered commits removed Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c index 5cd3cad..7229319 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c +++ b/arch/arm/ma

[PATCH 4/4 returns] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-18 Thread Roel Kluin
Thanks for comments, here a second version with previously covered commits removed Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c index 5cd3cad..7229319 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-18 Thread Roel Kluin
Al Viro wrote: On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 03:46:43PM +0200, Roel Kluin wrote: +++ b/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ static void write_status(acpi_handle handle, int out, int mask) switch (mask) { case MLED_ON: -out = !out 0x1; +out = !(out

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-18 Thread Roel Kluin
previously applied changes removed and changed as suggested. Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c b/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c index 7dce318..752ae26 100644 --- a/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c +++ b/drivers/misc/asus-laptop.c @@ -322,7 +322,7

[PATCH 4/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
if(!x & y) should either be if(!(x & y)) or if(!x && y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c index 5cd3cad..7229319 100644 -

Re: [PATCH 2/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
Roel Kluin wrote: > if(!x & y) should either be if(!(x & y)) or if(!x && y) > I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review > > several changes to drivers/net/ > > Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > hmmm

Re: [PATCH 3/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
commit 568f9787e58b4d24be50ab2abf1c7dab12a9ef2c Author: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed Oct 17 15:16:44 2007 +0200 if(!x & y) should either be if(!(x & y)) or if(!x && y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review several c

[PATCH 2/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
if(!x & y) should either be if(!(x & y)) or if(!x && y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review several changes to drivers/net/ Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000e/82571.c b/drivers/ne

[PATCH 1/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
if(!x & y) should either be if(!(x & y)) or if(!x && y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review this is against current git. Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/media/video/pvrusb2/pvrusb2-ctrl.c b/drive

[PATCH 1/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
if(!x y) should either be if(!(x y)) or if(!x y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review this is against current git. Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/drivers/media/video/pvrusb2/pvrusb2-ctrl.c b/drivers/media/video/pvrusb2

Re: [PATCH 2/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
Roel Kluin wrote: if(!x y) should either be if(!(x y)) or if(!x y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review several changes to drivers/net/ Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] hmmm forgot to place '---' here, should I resend? diff --git

[PATCH 4/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
if(!x y) should either be if(!(x y)) or if(!x y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c index 5cd3cad..7229319 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/mfp.c

[PATCH 2/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
if(!x y) should either be if(!(x y)) or if(!x y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review several changes to drivers/net/ Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000e/82571.c b/drivers/net/e1000e/82571.c index cf70522

Re: [PATCH 3/4] fix not-and/or errors

2007-10-17 Thread Roel Kluin
commit 568f9787e58b4d24be50ab2abf1c7dab12a9ef2c Author: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed Oct 17 15:16:44 2007 +0200 if(!x y) should either be if(!(x y)) or if(!x y) I made changes as seemed appropriate, but please review several changes to drivers/isdn/ Signed

Re: [PATCH] tty_ioctl: Fix the baud_table check in encode_baud_rate

2007-10-16 Thread Roel Kluin
Since you were sending a fix, possibly I shouldn't comment on this. If so please disregard my suggestion for a trivial cleanup. Roel Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > +void tty_termios_encode_baud_rate(struct ktermios *termios, > + speed_t ibaud, speed_t obaud) > { >

Re: [PATCH] tty_ioctl: Fix the baud_table check in encode_baud_rate

2007-10-16 Thread Roel Kluin
Since you were sending a fix, possibly I shouldn't comment on this. If so please disregard my suggestion for a trivial cleanup. Roel Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: +void tty_termios_encode_baud_rate(struct ktermios *termios, + speed_t ibaud, speed_t obaud) {

Re: [PATCH try #2] Input/Joystick Driver: add support AD7142 joystick driver

2007-10-12 Thread Roel Kluin
Bryan Wu wrote: > +static int ad7142_i2c_read(struct i2c_client *client, unsigned short offset, > + unsigned short *data, unsigned int len) > +{ > + int ret = -1; > + int i; > + u8 block_data[32]; > + > + if (len < 1 && len > 16) { you want || here > +

Re: [PATCH try #2] Input/Joystick Driver: add support AD7142 joystick driver

2007-10-12 Thread Roel Kluin
Bryan Wu wrote: +static int ad7142_i2c_read(struct i2c_client *client, unsigned short offset, + unsigned short *data, unsigned int len) +{ + int ret = -1; + int i; + u8 block_data[32]; + + if (len 1 len 16) { you want || here + printk(KERN_ERR

Re: [PATCH 09/31] IGET: Stop BFS from using iget() and read_inode() [try #3]

2007-10-10 Thread Roel Kluin
It is very well possible that I misunderstand the locking order here, but FWIW: David Howells wrote: > diff --git a/fs/bfs/inode.c b/fs/bfs/inode.c > index f346eb1..76798c9 100644 > --- a/fs/bfs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/bfs/inode.c > @@ -32,25 +32,29 @@ MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); > > void

Re: [PATCH 09/31] IGET: Stop BFS from using iget() and read_inode() [try #3]

2007-10-10 Thread Roel Kluin
It is very well possible that I misunderstand the locking order here, but FWIW: David Howells wrote: diff --git a/fs/bfs/inode.c b/fs/bfs/inode.c index f346eb1..76798c9 100644 --- a/fs/bfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/bfs/inode.c @@ -32,25 +32,29 @@ MODULE_LICENSE(GPL); void dump_imap(const char

Re: [PATCH v4] IBM power meter driver

2007-10-09 Thread Roel Kluin
Mark M. Hoffman wrote: >> +static void ibmpex_register_bmc(int iface, struct device *dev) >> +{ >> +struct ibmpex_bmc_data *data; >> +int err; >> + >> +data = kzalloc(sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL); >> +if (!data) { >> +printk(KERN_ERR DRVNAME ": Insufficient memory for BMC

Re: [PATCH v4] IBM power meter driver

2007-10-09 Thread Roel Kluin
Mark M. Hoffman wrote: +static void ibmpex_register_bmc(int iface, struct device *dev) +{ +struct ibmpex_bmc_data *data; +int err; + +data = kzalloc(sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL); +if (!data) { +printk(KERN_ERR DRVNAME : Insufficient memory for BMC +

Re: [patch 08/12] NLM: Fix a circular lock dependency in lockd

2007-10-08 Thread Roel Kluin
Greg KH wrote: @@ -477,10 +479,15 @@ nlmsvc_testlock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, if (block == NULL) { struct file_lock *conf = kzalloc(sizeof(*conf), GFP_KERNEL); + struct nlm_host *host; if (conf == NULL) return

Re: [patch 08/12] NLM: Fix a circular lock dependency in lockd

2007-10-08 Thread Roel Kluin
Greg KH wrote: @@ -477,10 +479,15 @@ nlmsvc_testlock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, if (block == NULL) { struct file_lock *conf = kzalloc(sizeof(*conf), GFP_KERNEL); + struct nlm_host *host; if (conf == NULL) return

Re: [PATCH] use array_size macro

2007-09-28 Thread Roel Kluin
Jeff Dike wrote: > On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 12:56:31PM +0200, Roel Kluin wrote: >> arch/um/kernel/tt/ptproxy/ptrace.c | 12 ++-- > > I don't know what you're diffing against, but this file is history in > -mm, and will be gone in mainline after 2.6.23. > > J

Re: [PATCH] use array_size macro

2007-09-28 Thread Roel Kluin
Please use this one instead. it also removes an unnecessary #define. This patch changes code to use the ARRAY_SIZE macro. This patch is the result of: find -name *.[chsS] | xargs sed -i "s/sizeof(\(\w*\))[ \t]*\/[ \t]*sizeof(\1\[0\])/ARRAY_SIZE(\1)/g" Signed-off-by: Roel Klu

[PATCH] use array_size macro

2007-09-28 Thread Roel Kluin
This patch changes code to use the ARRAY_SIZE macro. This patch is the result of: find -name *.[chsS] | xargs sed -i "s/sizeof(\(\w*\))[ \t]*\/[ \t]*sizeof(\1\[0\])/ARRAY_SIZE(\1)/g" Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/dma-isa.c b/arc

Re: [PATCH] use array_size macro

2007-09-28 Thread Roel Kluin
Please use this one instead. it also removes an unnecessary #define. This patch changes code to use the ARRAY_SIZE macro. This patch is the result of: find -name *.[chsS] | xargs sed -i s/sizeof(\(\w*\))[ \t]*\/[ \t]*sizeof(\1\[0\])/ARRAY_SIZE(\1)/g Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED

[PATCH] use array_size macro

2007-09-28 Thread Roel Kluin
This patch changes code to use the ARRAY_SIZE macro. This patch is the result of: find -name *.[chsS] | xargs sed -i s/sizeof(\(\w*\))[ \t]*\/[ \t]*sizeof(\1\[0\])/ARRAY_SIZE(\1)/g Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/dma-isa.c b/arch/arm/kernel/dma-isa.c

Re: [PATCH] use array_size macro

2007-09-28 Thread Roel Kluin
Jeff Dike wrote: On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 12:56:31PM +0200, Roel Kluin wrote: arch/um/kernel/tt/ptproxy/ptrace.c | 12 ++-- I don't know what you're diffing against, but this file is history in -mm, and will be gone in mainline after 2.6.23. Jeff Thanks for noting me. I

<    1   2   3