于 2012年12月01日 00:24, Paul Fulghum 写道:
> My suggestion is to leave it as is for now until I can make
> those changes. I admit the current code is ugly enough to
> cause confusion (sorry Chen Gang), but I don't see any immediate danger.
>
do not need 'sorry', learn with each other. (I am just lea
On 11/29/2012 8:52 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
> 于 2012年11月30日 02:32, Greg KH 写道:
>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:57:59PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
And, I really don't understand here, why do you want to change this?
What is it going to change? And why?
>>>
>>> Why:
>>> for the context MGSLPC_INF
于 2012年11月30日 11:27, Paul Fulghum 写道:
>
> I’m the maintainer for these drivers. I only caught this message by
> chance and
> have not had a chance to review the entire thread and original patches.
> It’s late and I’m tired so I won’t be able to look at this until tomorrow.
>
> I do not doubt ther
于 2012年11月30日 11:27, Paul Fulghum 写道:
>
> I’m the maintainer for these drivers. I only caught this message by
> chance and
it seems you are not in MAINTAINER file.
is it suitable to add your name into MAINTAINER file ?
(if it was, please help adding ? I am not quite familiar with it)
于 2012年11月30日 10:27, Chen Gang 写道:
> 于 2012年11月29日 21:41, Alan Cox 写道:
>> On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:07:28 +0800
>> Chen Gang wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Greg Kroah-Hartman:
>>>
>>> for MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE:
>>> it is defined as 4096;
>>> but for the max buffer size which it processes, is 65535.
>>> so
于 2012年11月30日 02:32, Greg KH 写道:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:57:59PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> And, I really don't understand here, why do you want to change this?
>>> What is it going to change? And why?
>>>
>>
>> Why:
>> for the context MGSLPC_INFO *info in drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c
于 2012年11月29日 21:41, Alan Cox 写道:
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:07:28 +0800
> Chen Gang wrote:
>
>> Hello Greg Kroah-Hartman:
>>
>> for MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE:
>> it is defined as 4096;
>> but for the max buffer size which it processes, is 65535.
>> so suggest to #define MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE 0x1
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:57:59PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> > And, I really don't understand here, why do you want to change this?
> > What is it going to change? And why?
> >
>
> Why:
> for the context MGSLPC_INFO *info in drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c
> info->max_frame_size can be t
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:07:28 +0800
Chen Gang wrote:
> Hello Greg Kroah-Hartman:
>
> for MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE:
> it is defined as 4096;
> but for the max buffer size which it processes, is 65535.
> so suggest to #define MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE 0x1 (better than 0x)
I don't see the n
于 2012年11月29日 13:13, Greg KH 写道:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:40:49PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> Hello Greg Kroah-Hartman:
>>
>> for MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE:
>> it is defined as 4096;
>> but for the max buffer size which it processes, is 65535.
>> so suggest to #define MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE 0x1
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:40:49PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> Hello Greg Kroah-Hartman:
>
> for MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE:
> it is defined as 4096;
> but for the max buffer size which it processes, is 65535.
> so suggest to #define MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE 0x1 (better than 0x)
Please, send
Hello Greg Kroah-Hartman:
for MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE:
it is defined as 4096;
but for the max buffer size which it processes, is 65535.
so suggest to #define MAX_ASYNC_BUFFER_SIZE 0x1 (better than 0x)
I use 3 Step to prove it, please see below:
by the way:
I find it only through
12 matches
Mail list logo
