From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: neil@brown.name (NeilBrown) Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 08:39:55 +1000 Subject: [PATCH v2] staging: mt7621-eth: Fix sparse warning in ethtool.c In-Reply-To: <20180402114103.GA29354@demeter.lkamp.de> References: <20180329095637.GA16778@kroah.com> <20180329124745.24694-1-cmc@babblebit.net> <87vada1owt.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <1522638255.18424.44.camel@mtkswgap22> <87po3i1dhu.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <20180402114103.GA29354@demeter.lkamp.de> Message-ID: <87efjx1bd0.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Apr 02 2018, Christian L?tke-Stetzkamp wrote: > On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 01:41:33PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 02 2018, Sean Wang wrote: >> > Hi, Neil >> > >> > Forgive me I cannot find the cover letter in the original series in my >> > mailbox to make a reply, so I rudely made here just letting you know >> > something good to the growth of mt7621 support in upstream. >> > >> > If so, it would become a bit easier for me that maybe I could give a >> > hand for migrating these staging driver for mt7621 to mainline. I >> > thought mmc, pci, ethernet, gsw and hsdma all could probably reuse the >> > current mainline code. >> >> I agree that it is quite likely that several of these drivers could and >> should reuse current mainline code. I would love to have some help >> sorting this out. I won't have much time myself to dig into it for >> several weeks, but I'll make time to review and test any code that is >> contributed. >> >> Thanks, >> NeilBrown > > Hi, > > I have started a patch series for the mmc driver that is currently in > staging, that makes some of the first cleanups (whitespace, indent,..) > and also starts to clean up the code, to make the similarities and > differences to the current mainline code clearer. The series is far > from being complete, but I think I'm going to send it out today, so > you can look and comment. > > I would suggest that we continue cleaning the code that is currently > in staging to remove the dead parts and make the diff to the mainline > code obvious. Do you agree with that proposal or do you suggest a > different plan? I think this is an excellent plan - thanks for doing it. I'll hopefully look over your patches today and send any comments. Thanks, NeilBrown -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 832 bytes Desc: not available URL: