| Message ID | 52c5893a-5927-4c83-4838-d618d434922c@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | daae020ce9fe4324322c6ed18a840234a05d76b3 |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 10:02:34PM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> Both elements are not used, so remove them.
I'm missing a lot of patches from this series, at least the first one
but there's a bunch of others too. Please check and resend.
Am 03.09.2016 um 02:09 schrieb Mark Brown: > On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 10:02:34PM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >> Both elements are not used, so remove them. > > I'm missing a lot of patches from this series, at least the first one > but there's a bunch of others too. Please check and resend. > Patches 1 and 4-7 of the series you applied already. Yesterday I sent a v2 of patches 2, 3 and about an hour later v2 of patches 8-23. Based on your review comments it's mainly about reordering patches (do trivial things first), smaller code style fixes, and mainly rebasing. Maybe some issue with referencing the mails correctly? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 11:04:29PM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > Am 03.09.2016 um 02:09 schrieb Mark Brown: > > I'm missing a lot of patches from this series, at least the first one > > but there's a bunch of others too. Please check and resend. > Patches 1 and 4-7 of the series you applied already. Yesterday I sent > a v2 of patches 2, 3 and about an hour later v2 of patches 8-23. Patch numbering exists solely in order to sort the patches within the series you're sending. If you've previously sent patches that's totally irrelevant and confuses things, just number the patches in order without gaps. > Based on your review comments it's mainly about reordering patches > (do trivial things first), smaller code style fixes, and mainly rebasing. > Maybe some issue with referencing the mails correctly? Not sure what you mean here but if you're trying to send the patches in reply to their versions in the earlier series that also confuses things.
Am 03.09.2016 um 23:59 schrieb Mark Brown: > On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 11:04:29PM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: >> Am 03.09.2016 um 02:09 schrieb Mark Brown: > >>> I'm missing a lot of patches from this series, at least the first one >>> but there's a bunch of others too. Please check and resend. > >> Patches 1 and 4-7 of the series you applied already. Yesterday I sent >> a v2 of patches 2, 3 and about an hour later v2 of patches 8-23. > > Patch numbering exists solely in order to sort the patches within the > series you're sending. If you've previously sent patches that's totally > irrelevant and confuses things, just number the patches in order without > gaps. > OK, so I'll resend the remaining 18 patches of the series with new numbering. >> Based on your review comments it's mainly about reordering patches >> (do trivial things first), smaller code style fixes, and mainly rebasing. >> Maybe some issue with referencing the mails correctly? > > Not sure what you mean here but if you're trying to send the patches in > reply to their versions in the earlier series that also confuses things. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-espi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-espi.c index f9ef504..a9004fe 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-espi.c +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-fsl-espi.c @@ -41,8 +41,6 @@ struct fsl_espi_transfer { const void *tx_buf; void *rx_buf; unsigned len; - unsigned n_tx; - unsigned n_rx; unsigned actual_length; int status; }; @@ -371,24 +369,16 @@ static int fsl_espi_do_one_msg(struct spi_master *master, { struct spi_transfer *t; u8 *rx_buf = NULL; - unsigned int n_tx = 0; - unsigned int n_rx = 0; unsigned int xfer_len = 0; struct fsl_espi_transfer espi_trans; list_for_each_entry(t, &m->transfers, transfer_list) { - if (t->tx_buf) - n_tx += t->len; - if (t->rx_buf) { - n_rx += t->len; + if (t->rx_buf) rx_buf = t->rx_buf; - } if ((t->tx_buf) || (t->rx_buf)) xfer_len += t->len; } - espi_trans.n_tx = n_tx; - espi_trans.n_rx = n_rx; espi_trans.len = xfer_len; espi_trans.actual_length = 0; espi_trans.status = 0;
Both elements are not used, so remove them. Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com> --- v2: - switch order of patches 2 and 3 to do the trivial changes first --- drivers/spi/spi-fsl-espi.c | 12 +----------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 11 deletions(-)