On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 05:16:27PM +0900, DaeSeok Youn wrote: > Hi, Dan > > > > 2014-06-13 17:00 GMT+09:00 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@oracle.com>: > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 04:41:47PM +0900, Daeseok Youn wrote: > >> dgap_tty_unregister() will unregister serial_driver > >> and print_driver, and also free related variables. > >> > > > > Introducing a static function without a caller will cause a GCC warning > > about unused functions. > > > > Fold 5,7 and 8 together into one patch. This is still "one thing per > > patch" because they can't be done separately. > OK. I will do. And then this series of patches will resend, right?
I'm afraid so. New GCC warnings are against the rules even if you fix it in a later patch. Since you're redoing it, can I suggest that patch 8 should just move the code to dgap_init_one() and change the dgap_firmware_load() prototype and then another patch should add the error handling. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
