From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: xerofoify@gmail.com (nick) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 21:21:18 -0400 Subject: Trial Patch In-Reply-To: <87938.1410300222@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> References: <540E6F3E.60802@gmail.com> <2c423d93-f6a9-4141-a856-6dce6de56599@email.android.com> <59721.1410280833@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <540F6E23.9090508@gmail.com> <87938.1410300222@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Message-ID: <540FA78E.5080400@gmail.com> To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org List-Id: kernelnewbies.lists.kernelnewbies.org On 14-09-09 06:03 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote: > On Tue, 09 Sep 2014 17:16:19 -0400, nick said: > >> I am sending this in again fixed and working. > > Typos are still there, and zero explanation of how you verified > "fixed and working", which given your track record of failing to > even compile test your code is a *big* show-stopper. > > If you don't care about your patch enough to even bother fixing > the typos, why should anybody else care? > >> I also looked at your complain about write_nic_byte and this seems to be >> there if this succeeds. > > OK. This is C 101. How does write_nic_byte() get called if we just did > the 'return false' and left both the do/while loop and the entire > function in your patch? > Not going to execute, I wasn't sure if that statement needs to be executed. Seems it needs to be for the driver to be activated. Thanks for helping out with my sloppiness :) and being patience. If there are any more problems let me known. Nick -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 0001-staging-Fix-NULL-check-for-allocating-the-skb-in-r81.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1479 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20140909/b3c63bd9/attachment.bin