christian pellegrin wrote: > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hi Christian, >> > > Hi, > >> there are a few. In general, please check the usage of {} for if > > sorry for missing this: I read your link below: I missed that rule on > first reading! And I tend to trust checkpatch.pl too much ;-) > >> statements and check if "if (ret)" should be used instead of "if (ret < >> 0)" if 0 means success and !0 failure. I don't have a MCP251x hardware > > ok, I misunderstood this to. Now I think it's ok. > > I'm replying to this thread with v2 patch. I'm rebasing the > differences against SVN trunk too, but I'm waiting to send them until > this patch is accepted in net-next-2.6 since their are only of > cosmetic nature.
That's fine. of course. [snip] >>> +#include <linux/can/core.h> >> I don't think you need "can/core.h"? >> > > I tried without but there are some dependencies in "can/dev.h" to some > netdev stuff that are broken if I omit it. Hm, sounds like a bug. I will check a.s.a.p. Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
