From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BED322F47 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 09:43:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E9B0C4339C; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 09:43:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1675676639; bh=BLBlNcQq7iMAgQJd1jPGiu4pcQKBixJyR1fnAst7nOo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=UWq7tDV8MbPN/xGCWTaNxObOk86UcoHR/Imxk25zvxp6XRZ6aXkXtIFRqb/IT5SEs lMfabDhNBpFrortm/BlVDphE1HlgpNysK1nLK35cRnG53y94+mRt8Q6I9Mlo2j5icU 677CdNQhCQshrEeSJ2DibJ2Gnp04iF/7cMpIyOvU= Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:43:56 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Guru Mehar Rachaputi Cc: Christophe JAILLET , Forest Bond , linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] staging: vt6655: Macro with braces issue change to inline function Message-ID: References: <3cb45313-209a-8190-12f8-6a2d49e4173b@wanadoo.fr> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 12:39:08AM +0100, Guru Mehar Rachaputi wrote: > On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 08:12:31PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > > Le 05/02/2023 à 19:11, Guru Mehar Rachaputi a écrit : > > > This patch is to fix checkpatch warning: "Macro argument 'iobase' may be better > > > as '(iobase)' to avoid precedence issues" changed to inline function. In > > > relation to this, names of the callers of macro are also modified to call > > > this function. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Guru Mehar Rachaputi > > > > Hi, > > > > this patch should be v4. > > You re-sent it with a modified commit message (the position of your S-o-b) > > > > The idea behind patch versions is to help maintainer. With the way you did, > > now 2 patches stating v3 are available. > > Which one is the correct one? > > The maintainer would need to look at both, search for differences, maybe > > look at the date of the mails. > > A v4 would be much easier for him. > > > > > > Also, when you send an updated version of a patch, it should always be > > "complete". I mean that the patch below seems to need v2, and maybe even v1 > > (which is apparently not on the linux-kernel mailing list). > > > > A maintainer can't know by himself what is needed and what is not. > > > > So you should resend a new patch. > > It should be a v4, and it should include what is needed from (v1?), v2 and > > v3 all together. > > > > CJ > > > > > > > --- > > > Changes in v3: > > > - Whitespace error from checkpatch fixed > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > - Macros with one statement that is to call 'iowrite8' function changed > > > to inline function as reviewed by gregkh@linuxfoundation.org. > > > In relation to this, names of the callers of macro are also modified > > > to call this function. > > > --- > > > drivers/staging/vt6655/card.c | 3 +-- > > > drivers/staging/vt6655/channel.c | 2 +- > > > drivers/staging/vt6655/mac.h | 4 ++-- > > > 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/card.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/card.c > > > index a6ff496b01b6..d2d122dc16d8 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/card.c > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/card.c > > > @@ -643,8 +643,7 @@ void CARDvSetRSPINF(struct vnt_private *priv, u8 bb_type) > > > &byRsvTime); > > > iowrite16(MAKEWORD(byTxRate, byRsvTime), priv->port_offset + MAC_REG_RSPINF_A_72); > > > /* Set to Page0 */ > > > - vt6655_mac_select_page0(priv->port_offset); > > > - > > > + vt6655_mac_select_page0(priv->port_offset); > > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&priv->lock, flags); > > > } > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/channel.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/channel.c > > > index e9a44bcebe32..60b445c38424 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/channel.c > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/channel.c > > > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ bool set_channel(struct vnt_private *priv, struct ieee80211_channel *ch) > > > iowrite8(priv->byCurPwr, priv->port_offset + MAC_REG_PWRCCK); > > > RFbSetPower(priv, RATE_6M, priv->byCurrentCh); > > > iowrite8(priv->byCurPwr, priv->port_offset + MAC_REG_PWROFDM); > > > - vt6655_mac_select_page0(priv->port_offset); > > > + vt6655_mac_select_page0(priv->port_offset); > > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&priv->lock, flags); > > > } > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/mac.h b/drivers/staging/vt6655/mac.h > > > index b9a7ca0fe604..ae3064303691 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/mac.h > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/mac.h > > > @@ -539,12 +539,12 @@ > > > static inline void vt6655_mac_select_page0(void __iomem *iobase) > > > { > > > - iowrite8(0, iobase + MAC_REG_PAGE1SEL); > > > + iowrite8(0, iobase + MAC_REG_PAGE1SEL); > > > } > > > static inline void vt6655_mac_select_page1(void __iomem *iobase) > > > { > > > - iowrite8(1, iobase + MAC_REG_PAGE1SEL); > > > + iowrite8(1, iobase + MAC_REG_PAGE1SEL); > > > } > > > #define MAKEWORD(lb, hb) \ > > > > Thanks for the explaination. > Since I amended commit message and thought as there is no new commit it > should still be the same patch. > > Is it ok if I send a new patchset based on the previous conversations? > I have four commits now, 4th commit being just the commit message and > this patchset doesn't have s-o-b issue. Look at other submissions on the mailing lists. When you submit a new version of a patch, it is stand-alone, with no dependancies on anything else, otherwise tracking that would be impossible, right? I suggest reading through the kernelnewbies.org "first patch submission" tutorial first as I think it will answer questions like this. good luck! greg k-h