From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] 3c59x: Use setup_timer()
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 16:53:27 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1602281651160.17144@lianli.shorne-pla.net>
References: <20160224135819.GA14426@amitoj-Inspiron-3542> <20160225.165218.2138194136809439003.davem@davemloft.net> <alpine.LFD.2.20.1602280338040.17144@lianli.shorne-pla.net> <CA+5yK5GF4mCZe8xeDwnj7QOz1m2xz2HOVkO59wdsBktZ3kmzYA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	klassert@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	"Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CA+5yK5GF4mCZe8xeDwnj7QOz1m2xz2HOVkO59wdsBktZ3kmzYA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org



On Sun, 28 Feb 2016, Amitoj Kaur Chawla wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, David Miller wrote:
> >
> >> From: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>
> >> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 19:28:19 +0530
> >>
> >>> Convert a call to init_timer and accompanying intializations of
> >>> the timer's data and function fields to a call to setup_timer.
> >>>
> >>> The Coccinelle semantic patch that fixes this problem is
> >>> as follows:
> >>>
> >>> // <smpl>
> >>> @@
> >>> expression t,f,d;
> >>> @@
> >>>
> >>> -init_timer(&t);
> >>> +setup_timer(&t,f,d);
> >>>  ...
> >>> -t.data = d;
> >>> -t.function = f;
> >>> // </smpl>
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@gmail.com>
> >>
> >>
> >> Applied.
> >
> >
> > Hi David, Amitoj,
> >
> > The patch here seemed to remove the call to add_timer(&vp->timer) which
> > applies the expires time. Would that be an issue?
> >
> > -Stafford
> 
> I'm sorry. This is my mistake. How can I rectify it now that the patch
> is applied?
> 
> Should I send a patch adding it back?

I sent a patch just now which could help to restore the behavior.

This is applied on top of your patch which I pulled from Dave's
tree here:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git

-Stafford