From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S967290AbaFQVxS (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:53:18 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:57503 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S967264AbaFQVxM (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:53:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:57:09 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Nicholas Krause Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, lisa@xenapiadmin.com, ben@decadent.org.uk, valentina.manea.m@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] Fixes function fw_download_code to check for Null return from dev_skb_alloc Message-ID: <20140617215709.GA20496@kroah.com> References: <1403039881-16050-1-git-send-email-xerofoify@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1403039881-16050-1-git-send-email-xerofoify@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lots of things wrong here, please step back, and slow down. Your subject, this really isn't "v2", is it? On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 05:18:01PM -0400, Nicholas Krause wrote: > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Krause You aren't saying what you are doing here in the body of the patch, why not? > --- > drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_firmware.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_firmware.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_firmware.c > index 11e915e..e4c8224 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_firmware.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_firmware.c > @@ -62,12 +62,14 @@ static bool fw_download_code(struct net_device *dev, u8 *code_virtual_address, > > skb = dev_alloc_skb(frag_length + 4); > if (!skb){ > + rt_status = false; > + return rt_status; > + } Again, this patch will not apply to the tree, you are making it against your previous patch, which was rejected. There is no way I can take this, right? Please start over and try again from a "clean" kernel tree. thanks, greg k-h