Re: [PATCH 2.6.2-rc1-mm3] fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c

[Bryan Whitehead <driver@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Tim Cambrant wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 08:48:59PM -0800, Bryan Whitehead wrote:
> 
>>This patch keeps the same functionality but removes the warning the compiler generates.
> 
> 
> I sent you a patch exactly like this a few days ago, but I don't know
> if you got it. This way is a lot more simple than the approach you went
> for in your last patch, but it really shouldn't matter at all. All it
> does is to clear a warning. One tip though, in SubmittingPatches you
> can read that the best way to create patches is by making them apply
> with the -p1 flag. This is done by including the actual kernel source
> directory when making the diff, such as this:

I didn't get it. Sorry.

> diff -up linux/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c.orig linux/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> 
> It doesn't matter what you named your kernel directory, since the -p1 flag
> ignores that name. Using this command will improve your chances of getting
> your patches included.
> 
> 
>                 Tim Cambrant

In Documentation/SubmittingPatches it says this:

To create a patch for a single file, it is often sufficient to do:

         SRCTREE= /devel/linux-2.4
         MYFILE=  drivers/net/mydriver.c

         cd $SRCTREE
         cp $MYFILE $MYFILE.orig
         vi $MYFILE      # make your change
         diff -up $MYFILE.orig $MYFILE > /tmp/patch

 From the example I am supposed to be in my source tree, not just 
outside it.

Does the documentation need to be changed? It seems everyone I've sent a 
patch to would like a patch that looks like "diff -up 
linux/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c.orig linux/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c" 
instead of "diff -up fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c.orig 
fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c".

If this is the case I wouldn't mind updating the docs and submitting a 
patch. ;)

-- 
Bryan Whitehead
Email:driver@megahappy.net
WorkE:driver@jpl.nasa.gov