From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:17612 "EHLO c60.cesmail.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751223AbYGaBlD (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:41:03 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] ath9k: Fix missing brace in branch on ath_chainmask_sel_logic() From: Pavel Roskin To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: Luis Rodriguez , "linville@tuxdriver.com" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org" , Jouni Malinen , Vasanth Thiagarajan In-Reply-To: <20080731012128.GI7625@tesla> References: <4800d552efce6350888c68b859f66767196d720b.1217309551.git.lrodriguez@atheros.com> <40a067eab54b9b366002257d5be8e4577b067408.1217309551.git.lrodriguez@atheros.com> <1217466707.3616.5.camel@dv> <20080731012128.GI7625@tesla> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:41:01 -0400 Message-Id: <1217468461.17029.2.camel@dv> (sfid-20080731_034133_395373_E223AC9C) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 18:21 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 06:11:47PM -0700, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 22:47 -0700, lrodriguez@atheros.com wrote: > > > From: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c > > > index 47d4891..d9c7561 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/core.c > > > @@ -508,9 +508,10 @@ int ath_chainmask_sel_logic(struct ath_softc *sc, struct ath_node *an) > > > * enabled/disabled setting > > > */ > > > if ((sc->sc_no_tx_3_chains == AH_FALSE) || > > > - (sc->sc_config.chainmask_sel == AH_FALSE)) > > > + (sc->sc_config.chainmask_sel == AH_FALSE)) { > > > cm->cur_tx_mask = sc->sc_tx_chainmask; > > > return cm->cur_tx_mask; > > > + } > > > > I would prefer that all compile fixes are amended in the patches that > > introduced them. We should try to pass only correct patches upstream. > > Bisection works best if one doesn't hit code that doesn't compile. > > The patch that caused this was not *one* patch but the introduction > patch. This is why I put this in a separate patch. If we want to start > out fresh that's another thing and I can just submit a shiny new driver > introduction patch. But I don't think that is required at this point > since this driver hasn't been merged yet. At this point users are > using this from ath9k.git and from patches posted on the lists. At > this point though I would like to keep the patches separated as we > did receive a good number of contributions from the community. It also > shows the changes we've made so far since our initial release. I was wrong to assume that the original code would not compile. Actually, it would, just not the way it was intended, i.e. it would return unconditionally. Never mind, sorry. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin