From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 05/11] intel-ethernet: make W=1 build cleanly
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 16:28:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200911162843.00002730@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877dt0nr8r.fsf@intel.com>
Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c
> > index 4e7a0810eaeb..2120dacfd55c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c
> > @@ -139,6 +139,7 @@ static void e1000_phy_init_script(struct e1000_hw *hw)
> > * at the end of this routine.
> > */
> > ret_val = e1000_read_phy_reg(hw, 0x2F5B, &phy_saved_data);
> > + e_dbg("Reading PHY register 0x2F5B failed: %d\n", ret_val);
> >
>
> Adding this debug statement seems unrelated.
Thanks, in the next version I actually addressed this in the commit
message, that this one change was to solve the "you didn't use ret_val"
with a conceivably useful message. I also rejiggered the patches to
have the register read lvalue removals all in their own patch instead
of squashed together with kdoc changes.
>
> > /* Disabled the PHY transmitter */
> > e1000_write_phy_reg(hw, 0x2F5B, 0x0003);
>
> Apart from this,
>
> Reviewed-by: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@intel.com>
>
Thanks for the review!
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
To: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@intel.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 05/11] intel-ethernet: make W=1 build cleanly
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 16:28:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200911162843.00002730@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877dt0nr8r.fsf@intel.com>
Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c
> > index 4e7a0810eaeb..2120dacfd55c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_hw.c
> > @@ -139,6 +139,7 @@ static void e1000_phy_init_script(struct e1000_hw *hw)
> > * at the end of this routine.
> > */
> > ret_val = e1000_read_phy_reg(hw, 0x2F5B, &phy_saved_data);
> > + e_dbg("Reading PHY register 0x2F5B failed: %d\n", ret_val);
> >
>
> Adding this debug statement seems unrelated.
Thanks, in the next version I actually addressed this in the commit
message, that this one change was to solve the "you didn't use ret_val"
with a conceivably useful message. I also rejiggered the patches to
have the register read lvalue removals all in their own patch instead
of squashed together with kdoc changes.
>
> > /* Disabled the PHY transmitter */
> > e1000_write_phy_reg(hw, 0x2F5B, 0x0003);
>
> Apart from this,
>
> Reviewed-by: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@intel.com>
>
Thanks for the review!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-11 23:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-11 1:23 [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 00/11] make drivers/net/ethernet W=1 clean Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 01/11] i40e: prepare flash string in a simpler way Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 02/11] i40e: clean up W=1 warnings in i40e Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-23 2:02 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Brown, Aaron F
2020-09-23 2:02 ` Brown, Aaron F
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 03/11] iavf: clean up W=1 warnings in iavf Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-23 3:12 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Brown, Aaron F
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 04/11] ixgbe: clean up W=1 warnings in ixgbe Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-23 3:57 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Brown, Aaron F
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 05/11] intel-ethernet: make W=1 build cleanly Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 17:43 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Vinicius Costa Gomes
2020-09-11 17:43 ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2020-09-11 23:06 ` Jacob Keller
2020-09-11 23:28 ` Jesse Brandeburg [this message]
2020-09-11 23:28 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 06/11] drivers/net/ethernet: clean up unused assignments Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 17:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree
2020-09-11 17:16 ` Edward Cree
2020-09-11 23:03 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jacob Keller
2020-09-11 23:18 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 07/11] drivers/net/ethernet: rid ethernet of no-prototype warnings Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 08/11] drivers/net/ethernet: handle one warning explicitly Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 22:56 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jacob Keller
2020-09-11 22:56 ` Jacob Keller
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 09/11] drivers/net/ethernet: add some basic kdoc tags Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 10/11] drivers/net/ethernet: remove incorrectly formatted doc Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 22:59 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jacob Keller
2020-09-11 23:25 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-14 23:06 ` Jacob Keller
2020-09-11 1:23 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 11/11] drivers/net/ethernet: clean up mis-targeted comments Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 1:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 17:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree
2020-09-11 17:26 ` Edward Cree
2020-09-11 21:42 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 21:42 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 21:55 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree
2020-09-11 21:55 ` Edward Cree
2020-09-11 22:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-11 22:26 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-11 23:11 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree
2020-09-11 23:11 ` Edward Cree
2020-09-12 0:49 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-12 0:49 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-14 3:04 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Andrew Lunn
2020-09-14 3:04 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-09-11 14:55 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [RFC PATCH net-next v1 00/11] make drivers/net/ethernet W=1 clean Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-11 14:55 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-11 19:00 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 19:00 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 20:12 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-11 20:12 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-11 21:34 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 21:34 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-11 22:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-11 22:16 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-11 22:43 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Vladimir Oltean
2020-09-11 22:43 ` Vladimir Oltean
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200911162843.00002730@intel.com \
--to=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.