[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DM6PR11MB381922556FF1BB3FB550358985D90@DM6PR11MB3819.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 05:55:39 +0000
From: "Wu, Hao" <hao.wu@...el.com>
To: "Xu, Yilun" <yilun.xu@...el.com>
CC: Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, "mdf@...nel.org" <mdf@...nel.org>,
"linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"bhu@...hat.com" <bhu@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] fpga: dfl: pci: reduce the scope of variable 'ret'
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fpga: dfl: pci: reduce the scope of variable 'ret'
> > >
> > > Hi Rix:
> > >
> > > This patch is based on linux-next. There is an preceding patch
> > > (3c2760b78f90 "fpga: dfl: pci: fix return value of cci_pci_sriov_configure",
> > > Also see Fixes:) in linux-next but not merged in 5.7-rc1 yet.
> > > This patch is to fix the lkp warning brought by the previous one.
> >
> > Yilun
> >
> > Is it possible that commit id may be different for master then?
>
> It is possible if the previous patch need a little change when merging
> to master.
>
> I'm not sure how to handle this then. But the previous patch is simple
> and is unlikely to change.
Maybe you can resend it once previous patch gets merged.
Hao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists