On 2018-08-10 01:04 AM, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 01:19:53PM -0400, greg gallagher wrote:
On 2018-08-07 12:47 AM, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 12:15:04AM -0400, Greg Gallagher wrote:
Hi,
I creating my first patch to the kernel. I followed the
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 01:19:53PM -0400, greg gallagher wrote:
>
>
> On 2018-08-07 12:47 AM, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 12:15:04AM -0400, Greg Gallagher wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>I creating my first patch to the kernel. I followed the
> >>instruction on the newbies wiki
On 2018-08-07 12:47 AM, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 12:15:04AM -0400, Greg Gallagher wrote:
Hi,
I creating my first patch to the kernel. I followed the
instruction on the newbies wiki and everything went smoothly. I got
feedback from the maintainer to fix all the
On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 12:15:04AM -0400, Greg Gallagher wrote:
> Hi,
>I creating my first patch to the kernel. I followed the
> instruction on the newbies wiki and everything went smoothly. I got
> feedback from the maintainer to fix all the alignment issues in the
> file instead of just
Hi,
I creating my first patch to the kernel. I followed the
instruction on the newbies wiki and everything went smoothly. I got
feedback from the maintainer to fix all the alignment issues in the
file instead of just the one i picked. My question is if I fix 10
alignment issues identified by
On 19.04.2017 18:46, Perry Hooker wrote:
>
> Understood. I'm still open to the possibility that I've made a mistake
> - I don't want to re-submit the patch if my analysis is incorrect.
>
> Maybe I didn't make it clear (my apologies if so) - what I'm really
> looking for here is help confirming
Thank you for your reply.
> It's _your_ responsibility to convince me that your patch is correct and
> should be applied. If no one respondes after a week or so, resend it,
> with your additional information in the changelog so that the same
> conversation doesn't happen again.
Understood. I'm
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 09:54:33AM -0600, Perry Hooker wrote:
> At this point, no one has commented on the accuracy of my analysis.
> Such comments are exactly what I'm hoping for (and what I requested -
> not "demanded" - in my replies).
As the one responsible for actually applying this specific
> Dan Carpenter is very good at what he dose. I would be hesitant to
> ever call him or anyone as experienced 'flat-out incorrect'.
Mr. Carpenter's first assertion that the patch "introduces bugs" was
incorrect by his own admission:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/22/120
Additionally, his assertion
> As far as I understood Dan Carpenters (last) post in that thread, the content
> in the buffer
> is already in little endian order. In this case the code is correct as it is
> and there is no need
> for the change you propose.
Yes, I believe Mr. Carpenter is mistaken - I think the data is in
Hi,
On 18.04.2017 01:28, Perry Hooker wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I recently submitted a patch to the kernel mailing list:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/21/712
>
> I received some feedback on the patch. After a bit of polite
> back-and-forth, the respondent stopped replying when I asked for more
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 05:07:08PM -0600, Perry Hooker wrote:
> Thanks for the advice, Tobin - I appreciate the reply.
Please don't top post http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
I'm not an endian expert so I will not comment on the technical
aspects of the path, I can however, comment on the
Thanks for the advice, Tobin - I appreciate the reply.
In this case, I've already followed your advice - I studied the
reviewer's comments with a fine-toothed comb (some of his comments
were flat-out incorrect), and traced the buffer in question back to
its source. It appears to be holding
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 05:28:46PM -0600, Perry Hooker wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I recently submitted a patch to the kernel mailing list:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/21/712
Link is broken.
> I received some feedback on the patch. After a bit of polite
> back-and-forth, the respondent stopped
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Perry Hooker
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I recently submitted a patch to the kernel mailing list:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/21/712
lkml.org seems to be down! Wow, what did you do!?! :P
-mandeep
>
>
> I received some feedback on
Hi everyone,
I recently submitted a patch to the kernel mailing list:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/21/712
I received some feedback on the patch. After a bit of polite
back-and-forth, the respondent stopped replying when I asked for more
information, and I haven't heard anything from the
16 matches
Mail list logo