From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.kapsi.fi ([217.30.184.167]:49184 "EHLO mail.kapsi.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932148Ab3GRPw3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Jul 2013 11:52:29 -0400 Message-ID: <51E80F10.8030406@iki.fi> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 18:51:44 +0300 From: Antti Palosaari MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Frank_Sch=E4fer?= CC: Alban Browaeys , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Alban Browaeys Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] [media] em28xx: fix assignment of the eeprom data. References: <1374015476-26197-1-git-send-email-prahal@yahoo.com> <51E80622.3020803@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <51E80622.3020803@googlemail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/18/2013 06:13 PM, Frank Schäfer wrote: > Am 17.07.2013 00:57, schrieb Alban Browaeys: >> Set the config structure pointer to the eeprom data pointer (data, >> here eedata dereferenced) not the pointer to the pointer to >> the eeprom data (eedata itself). >> >> Signed-off-by: Alban Browaeys >> --- >> drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-i2c.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-i2c.c b/drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-i2c.c >> index 4851cc2..c4ff973 100644 >> --- a/drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-i2c.c >> +++ b/drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-i2c.c >> @@ -726,7 +726,7 @@ static int em28xx_i2c_eeprom(struct em28xx *dev, unsigned bus, >> >> *eedata = data; >> *eedata_len = len; >> - dev_config = (void *)eedata; >> + dev_config = (void *)*eedata; >> >> switch (le16_to_cpu(dev_config->chip_conf) >> 4 & 0x3) { >> case 0: > Signed-off-by: Frank Schäfer Does that SOB mean you will pick that patch via you tree, or was it only a mistake? I have thought few times what should I reply to patches which are for modules I am maintaining and I will pick up and pull-request via own tree. Usually I just reply "patch applied" but maybe Signed-off-by is used for same. regards Antti -- http://palosaari.fi/