[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201112190202.GN1997862@dell>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:02:02 +0000
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To: santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com
Cc: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>, tomi.valkeinen@...com,
kishon@...com, dmurphy@...com, s-anna@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/25] soc: ti: knav_qmss_queue: Remove set but unchecked
variable 'ret'
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020, santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com wrote:
> On 11/12/20 5:21 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Nov 2020, Tero Kristo wrote:
> >
> > > On 12/11/2020 12:31, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > Cc:ing a few people I know.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 03 Nov 2020, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Fixes the following W=1 kernel build warning(s):
> > > > >
> > > > > drivers/soc/ti/knav_qmss_queue.c: In function ‘knav_setup_queue_pools’:
> > > > > drivers/soc/ti/knav_qmss_queue.c:1310:6: warning: variable ‘ret’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
> > > > >
> > > > > Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>
> > > > > Cc: Sandeep Nair <sandeep_n@...com>
> > > > > Cc: Cyril Chemparathy <cyril@...com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/soc/ti/knav_qmss_queue.c | 3 +--
> > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > Any idea who will take these TI patches?
> > > >
> > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20201111052540.GH173948@builder.lan/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!KEeMCT-GwmLNnDFCOqxnunXXiCrCpj3ZFXpiMzj55VmlOJ-FVhKmom-O7sq-CkL8s0sjAg$
> > > >
> > >
> > > (Dropped a few inactive emails from delivery.)
> > >
> > > Santosh is the maintainer for the subsystem, so my vote would go for him.
> >
> > Thanks for your prompt reply Tero.
> >
> > It looks as though Santosh has been on Cc since the start. He must
> > just be busy. I'll give him a little while longer before submitting a
> > [RESEND].
> >
> Go ahead and re-post. These seems to be trivial so will pick
> it up.
If you are in receipt of the first iteration, there shouldn't be any
requirement for a [RESEND]. Unless you deleted them from your inbox?
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists