[PATCH 4/4] Staging: android: Fix struct definitioni warning from static to const

[PATCH 4/4] Staging: android: Fix struct definitioni warning from static to const

[Kashyap Gada]

---
 drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c b/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
index 4a00174a5..9f1f27e 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
@@ -680,7 +680,7 @@ static long ashmem_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
 	return ret;
 }
 
-const struct file_operations ashmem_fops = {
+static const struct file_operations ashmem_fops = {
 	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
 	.open = ashmem_open,
 	.release = ashmem_release,
-- 
1.7.5.4

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: android: Fix struct definitioni warning from static to const

[Dan Carpenter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1256 bytes --]

On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 02:17:49AM +0000, Kashyap Gada wrote:
> ---
>  drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c b/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> index 4a00174a5..9f1f27e 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> @@ -680,7 +680,7 @@ static long ashmem_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> -const struct file_operations ashmem_fops = {
> +static const struct file_operations ashmem_fops = {
>  	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
>  	.open = ashmem_open,
>  	.release = ashmem_release,

No.  We're not going to merge the broken patch which removes the
static.

Plus your patch numbering is totally bogus.
[PATCH 2/2]
[PATCH 3/3]
[PATCH 4/4]
[PATCH 5/5]

The second number is supposed to say how many patches there are in
the series.  If these were bug fixes, we'd go out of our way to work
with you, but you're just sending random whitespace fixes so they
have to be pretty much perfect.  (In other words, please slow down
and work more carefully or else focus on fixing bugs instead of
whitespace).

regards,
dan carpenter

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: android: Fix struct definitioni warning from static to const

[Greg KH]

On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:08:38AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 02:17:49AM +0000, Kashyap Gada wrote:
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c |    2 +-
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c b/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> > index 4a00174a5..9f1f27e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> > @@ -680,7 +680,7 @@ static long ashmem_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > -const struct file_operations ashmem_fops = {
> > +static const struct file_operations ashmem_fops = {
> >  	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
> >  	.open = ashmem_open,
> >  	.release = ashmem_release,
> 
> No.  We're not going to merge the broken patch which removes the
> static.
> 
> Plus your patch numbering is totally bogus.
> [PATCH 2/2]
> [PATCH 3/3]
> [PATCH 4/4]
> [PATCH 5/5]
> 
> The second number is supposed to say how many patches there are in
> the series.  If these were bug fixes, we'd go out of our way to work
> with you, but you're just sending random whitespace fixes so they
> have to be pretty much perfect.  (In other words, please slow down
> and work more carefully or else focus on fixing bugs instead of
> whitespace).

The patches also don't have the most basic things needed for acceptance
(i.e. a description and most importantly, a Signed-off-by:), so I can't
take them at all.

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: android: Fix struct definitioni warning from static to const

[Greg KH]

A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?

http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top

On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 01:19:51PM +0000, Kashyap Gada wrote:
> Greg Im just following your tutorials and when i check the mail im sending in
> terminal it comes proper but when i see the mail what was sent by git
> send-email it doest have any of these. How to ensure proper patch numbers.

Send them all at once.

Also, you forgot the patch description and the signed-off-by, which I
know is mentioned in the tutorial.  Please read the file,
Documentation/SubmittingPatches please.

thanks,

greg k-h