Re: [PATCH RFC 01/17] staging: dgap: Merge dgap_fep5.c into dgap_driver.c
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:44:43PM -0500, Mark Hounschell wrote: Merge dgap_fep5.c into dgap_driver.c Signed-off-by: Mark Hounschell ma...@compro.net Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman gre...@linuxfoundation.org A good changelog comment doesn't just say what happens, but _why_ it is happening. Why are you merging these files? diff -urN linux-3.13.1-orig/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c linux-3.13.1-new/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c --- linux-3.13.1-orig/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c 2014-01-29 08:06:37.0 -0500 +++ linux-3.13.1-new/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c 2014-01-31 10:22:53.675819451 -0500 Did you generate this with git? What happened to the diffstat? thanks, greg k-h ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
Re: [PATCH RFC 01/17] staging: dgap: Merge dgap_fep5.c into dgap_driver.c
On 02/12/2014 01:39 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: diff -urN linux-3.13.1-orig/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c linux-3.13.1-new/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c --- linux-3.13.1-orig/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c 2014-01-29 08:06:37.0 -0500 +++ linux-3.13.1-new/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap_driver.c 2014-01-31 10:22:53.675819451 -0500 Did you generate this with git? What happened to the diffstat? No, I did not use git. I used what was suggested in Documentation/SubmittingPatches. Regards Mark ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
Re: [PATCH RFC 01/17] staging: dgap: Merge dgap_fep5.c into dgap_driver.c
On 02/12/2014 03:34 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: Greg mentioned doing the checkpatch.pl fixes later and that applies here as well. Leave the LINUX_VERSION_CODE code in for now and delete it in a later patch. On the other hand, I don't want to give you a lot of extra work to do if no one else cares... What I'm saying is that when you do moves, please *just* move the code exactly as unmodified as possible. I have tools to review that the code just shifted but was not modified. The truth is that when I review patches, I always pretend submitters work for the US government to sabotage things and insert backdoors. I want to verify that the patch does exactly what it says and nothing more. Understood. I just sent v2 of the series. I hope all is OK. Regards Mark ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
