Rebase against linux-next tree?

Rebase against linux-next tree?

[Perry Hooker]

I recently submitted a patch (attached below) that corrects a couple
of 'sparse' warnings in drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_dm.c.

I got this reply back from greg k-h:

> This patch does not apply to my tree at all :(
> Please rebase it against linux-next and try again.

However,  I thought I *was* working off linux-next. This is what I did:

$ git remote add linux-next
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
$ git fetch linux-next
$ git fetch --tags linux-next
$ git remote update
$ git checkout next-20170310
$ git apply 0001-staging-rtl8192u-use-__le16_to_cpu-instead-of-cast.patch

... and the patch applied ok.
Just to be sure, I also did this:

$ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
$ git apply 0001-staging-rtl8192u-use-__le16_to_cpu-instead-of-cast.patch

... and the patch again applied OK.

What am I doing wrong / where should I go for more info?

Thanks,
Perry

---
 drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_dm.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_dm.c
b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_dm.c
index 9209aad..33d105d 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_dm.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_dm.c
@@ -2304,9 +2304,9 @@ static void dm_check_edca_turbo(
                                /*  For Each time updating EDCA
parameter, reset EDCA turbo mode status. */
                                dm_init_edca_turbo(dev);
                                u1bAIFS = qos_parameters->aifs[0] *
((mode&(IEEE_G|IEEE_N_24G)) ? 9 : 20) + aSifsTime;
-                               u4bAcParam =
(((u32)(qos_parameters->tx_op_limit[0])) <<
AC_PARAM_TXOP_LIMIT_OFFSET)|
-
(((u32)(qos_parameters->cw_max[0])) << AC_PARAM_ECW_MAX_OFFSET)|
-
(((u32)(qos_parameters->cw_min[0])) << AC_PARAM_ECW_MIN_OFFSET)|
+                               u4bAcParam =
(((u32)__le16_to_cpu(qos_parameters->tx_op_limit[0])) <<
AC_PARAM_TXOP_LIMIT_OFFSET) |
+
(((u32)__le16_to_cpu(qos_parameters->cw_max[0])) <<
AC_PARAM_ECW_MAX_OFFSET) |
+
(((u32)__le16_to_cpu(qos_parameters->cw_min[0])) <<
AC_PARAM_ECW_MIN_OFFSET) |
                                        ((u32)u1bAIFS << AC_PARAM_AIFS_OFFSET);
                                /*write_nic_dword(dev,
WDCAPARA_ADD[i], u4bAcParam);*/
                                write_nic_dword(dev, EDCAPARA_BE,  u4bAcParam);

Rebase against linux-next tree?

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 07:52:36PM -0600, Perry Hooker wrote:
> I recently submitted a patch (attached below) that corrects a couple
> of 'sparse' warnings in drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_dm.c.
> 
> I got this reply back from greg k-h:
> 
> > This patch does not apply to my tree at all :(
> > Please rebase it against linux-next and try again.
> 
> However,  I thought I *was* working off linux-next. This is what I did:
> 
> $ git remote add linux-next
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
> $ git fetch linux-next
> $ git fetch --tags linux-next
> $ git remote update
> $ git checkout next-20170310
> $ git apply 0001-staging-rtl8192u-use-__le16_to_cpu-instead-of-cast.patch
> 
> ... and the patch applied ok.
> Just to be sure, I also did this:
> 
> $ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
> $ git apply 0001-staging-rtl8192u-use-__le16_to_cpu-instead-of-cast.patch
> 
> ... and the patch again applied OK.
> 
> What am I doing wrong / where should I go for more info?

linux-next is usually a day or so behind my tree, so maybe there were
other patches from other developers that caused the conflict.  Try
linux-next now and see if there still is a conflict or not, and if not,
rebase and resend the patches.

If you really want to do a lot of staging tree work, I suggest working
off of my staging-next or staging-testing branch.  Note, sometimes
staging-testing gets rebased, so unless you know how to handle that, I
would stay away from it :)

That's the fun of dealing with a subsystem that gets a few hundred
patches submitted every day, it moves fast...

thanks,

greg k-h

Rebase against linux-next tree?

[valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 10:26:48 +0900, Greg KH said:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 07:52:36PM -0600, Perry Hooker wrote:

> > $ git checkout next-20170310

> > What am I doing wrong / where should I go for more info?
>
> linux-next is usually a day or so behind my tree, so maybe there were
> other patches from other developers that caused the conflict.  Try
> linux-next now and see if there still is a conflict or not, and if not,
> rebase and resend the patches.

Stephen Rothwell posted that there won't be any linux-next this week.  Try
on Monday.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 484 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20170316/f1a8ac84/attachment.bin