linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 5/6] ARM: ep93xx: ts72xx: cosmetic: Add some description to ts72xx code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 30 Nov 2017 17:23:02 +0000
From:   Hartley Sweeten <HartleyS@...ionengravers.com>
To:     Lukasz Majewski <lukma@...x.de>,
        Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...il.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "arndbergmann@...il.com" <arndbergmann@...il.com>
CC:     Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 5/6] ARM: ep93xx: ts72xx: cosmetic: Add some
 description to ts72xx code

On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 5:45 PM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> This patch extends readability of ts72xx.c code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski <lukma@...x.de>
> ---
> Changes for v2:
> - New patch
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/ts72xx.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)

This patch does not apply to linux-next.

> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/ts72xx.c b/arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/ts72xx.c index a6e473b3dcf6..2e8fcc6e87b6 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/ts72xx.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/ts72xx.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,9 @@
>  #include "soc.h"
>  #include "ts72xx.h"
>  
> +/**********************************************************************
> +***
> + * IO map
> + 
> +***********************************************************************
> +**/

There is also something funny with the patch. The lines above appear to be getting split incorrectly.

The same thing is seen in PATCH 6/6.

Please rebase the series against linux-next and I'll take another look at is.

Thanks,
Hartley