Ravinandan Arakali wrote:
Jeff,
Sorry about that. We'll add the signed-off-by line.
We are sending the patches as and when they are completed.
In the next couple of days, the remaining patches should
be done. Do you want us to send them after all are complete
or is it okay to send each patch as and when completed ?
Thanks,
Ravi
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 5:11 PM
To: ravinandan.arakali@xxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Francois Romieu'; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx; leonid.grossman@xxxxxxxx;
raghavendra.koushik@xxxxxxxx; rapuru.sriram@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.9-rc2 4/8] S2io: hardware fixes
48 hours passed between patch #3 and patch #4. Is there a problem with
your email system?
Also, your patches do not include the "signed-off-by" line described in
the two documents I referenced. The "signed-off-by" line makes the
lawyers happy.
Since you missed that major legal item, please _read_ the following
documents:
http://linux.yyz.us/patch-format.html (see #5, "Sign your work")
http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/tpp.txt
Hi,
Maybe you already have this planned or patched, but it wasn't
in the "cosmetic" patch file.
In s2io.c, please convert this struct to C99 syntax:
static struct pci_driver s2io_driver = {
name:"S2IO",
id_table:s2io_tbl,
probe:s2io_init_nic,
remove:__devexit_p(s2io_rem_nic),
};
so that sparse won't complain like so:
drivers/net/s2io.c:238:7: warning: obsolete struct initializer, use
C99 syntax
drivers/net/s2io.c:239:7: warning: obsolete struct initializer, use
C99 syntax
drivers/net/s2io.c:240:7: warning: obsolete struct initializer, use
C99 syntax
drivers/net/s2io.c:241:7: warning: obsolete struct initializer, use
C99 syntax
and if you haven't tried sparse on the driver, that would be a
good idea.
--
~Randy
|