All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <20101117165248.GB21729@vigoh>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 76ecce6..fb7bce0 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -3,17 +3,16 @@ Hi Pavan,
 * Pavan Savoy <pavan_savoy@sify.com> [2010-11-17 11:13:26 +0530]:
 
 > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:50 AM, Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com> wrote:
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 /* Registration with ST layer is successful,
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0* hardware is ready to accept commands from HCI core.
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0*/
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 if (test_and_set_bit(HCI_RUNNING, &hdev->flags)) {
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 clear_bit(HCI_RUNNING, &hdev->flags);
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 err =3D st_unregister(ST_BT);
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 if (err)
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 BT_ERR("st_unregister() fai=
-led with error %d", err);
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 hst->st_write =3D NULL;
-> >>> + =A0 =A0 }
+> >>> +     /* Registration with ST layer is successful,
+> >>> +      * hardware is ready to accept commands from HCI core.
+> >>> +      */
+> >>> +     if (test_and_set_bit(HCI_RUNNING, &hdev->flags)) {
+> >>> +             clear_bit(HCI_RUNNING, &hdev->flags);
+> >>> +             err = st_unregister(ST_BT);
+> >>> +             if (err)
+> >>> +                     BT_ERR("st_unregister() failed with error %d", err);
+> >>> +             hst->st_write = NULL;
+> >>> +     }
 > >>
 > >>
 > >> What are you trying to do here? test_and_set_bit() result doesn't say
@@ -24,21 +23,21 @@ led with error %d", err);
 > >
 > > Yeap, this piece of code beats me is well. Why is it an error if this
 > > bit wasn't already set?
->=20
+> 
 > Vitaly, Gustavo,
->=20
+> 
 > I suppose I never understood HCI_RUNNING flag that way, as in an error
 > check mechanism to avoid multiple hci0 ups.
->=20
+> 
 > What I understood was that HCI_RUNNING suggested as to when hci0 was
 > ready to be used. With this understanding, I wanted to make sure I
 > downloaded the firmware for the chip before I proclaim to the world
 > that the hci0 is ready to be used, as in HCI_RUNNING.
->=20
+> 
 > For example, I didn't want my _send_frame to be called before I did
 > the firmware download - since firmware download takes time - 45kb
 > send/wait commands :(
->=20
+> 
 > But I suppose I now understand - What I would rather do is test_bit in
 > the beginning of function and do a set_bit at the end of function -
 > does this make sense ?
@@ -46,6 +45,6 @@ led with error %d", err);
 It does, but does it as test_and_set and then clear if error as we do in
 other drivers.
 
---=20
+-- 
 Gustavo F. Padovan
 http://profusion.mobi
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 8403550..eb62920 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -17,17 +17,16 @@
  "* Pavan Savoy <pavan_savoy@sify.com> [2010-11-17 11:13:26 +0530]:\n"
  "\n"
  "> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:50 AM, Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com> wrote:\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 /* Registration with ST layer is successful,\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0* hardware is ready to accept commands from HCI core.\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0*/\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 if (test_and_set_bit(HCI_RUNNING, &hdev->flags)) {\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 clear_bit(HCI_RUNNING, &hdev->flags);\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 err =3D st_unregister(ST_BT);\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 if (err)\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 BT_ERR(\"st_unregister() fai=\n"
- "led with error %d\", err);\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 hst->st_write =3D NULL;\n"
- "> >>> + =A0 =A0 }\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 /* Registration with ST layer is successful,\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 \302\240* hardware is ready to accept commands from HCI core.\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 \302\240*/\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 if (test_and_set_bit(HCI_RUNNING, &hdev->flags)) {\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 clear_bit(HCI_RUNNING, &hdev->flags);\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 err = st_unregister(ST_BT);\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 if (err)\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 BT_ERR(\"st_unregister() failed with error %d\", err);\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 hst->st_write = NULL;\n"
+ "> >>> + \302\240 \302\240 }\n"
  "> >>\n"
  "> >>\n"
  "> >> What are you trying to do here? test_and_set_bit() result doesn't say\n"
@@ -38,21 +37,21 @@
  "> >\n"
  "> > Yeap, this piece of code beats me is well. Why is it an error if this\n"
  "> > bit wasn't already set?\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> Vitaly, Gustavo,\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> I suppose I never understood HCI_RUNNING flag that way, as in an error\n"
  "> check mechanism to avoid multiple hci0 ups.\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> What I understood was that HCI_RUNNING suggested as to when hci0 was\n"
  "> ready to be used. With this understanding, I wanted to make sure I\n"
  "> downloaded the firmware for the chip before I proclaim to the world\n"
  "> that the hci0 is ready to be used, as in HCI_RUNNING.\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> For example, I didn't want my _send_frame to be called before I did\n"
  "> the firmware download - since firmware download takes time - 45kb\n"
  "> send/wait commands :(\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> But I suppose I now understand - What I would rather do is test_bit in\n"
  "> the beginning of function and do a set_bit at the end of function -\n"
  "> does this make sense ?\n"
@@ -60,8 +59,8 @@
  "It does, but does it as test_and_set and then clear if error as we do in\n"
  "other drivers.\n"
  "\n"
- "--=20\n"
+ "-- \n"
  "Gustavo F. Padovan\n"
  http://profusion.mobi
 
-9d883ee61aac31c1c6d7f8a187e06ead3bc5a0a4d8cfd03509b4698bcf8d073e
+2b8e1b490ab8566f5b954c443ccdf6e3b3ec859032e915e991c61c70d30a9ffc

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.