[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200515135359.GA2162457@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 15:53:59 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jerome Pouiller <Jerome.Pouiller@...abs.com>
Cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/19] staging: wfx: fix coherency of hif_scan() prototype
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:33:11AM +0200, Jerome Pouiller wrote:
> From: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
>
> The function hif_scan() return the timeout for the completion of the
> scan request. It is the only function from hif_tx.c that return another
> thing than just an error code. This behavior is not coherent with the
> rest of file. Worse, if value returned is positive, the caller can't
> make say if it is a timeout or the value returned by the hardware.
>
> Uniformize API with other HIF functions, only return the error code and
> pass timeout with parameters.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/wfx/hif_tx.c | 6 ++++--
> drivers/staging/wfx/hif_tx.h | 2 +-
> drivers/staging/wfx/scan.c | 6 +++---
> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
This patch fails to apply to my branch, so I've stopped here in the
patch series.
Can you rebase and resend the remaining ones?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists