Hi
>Close, but not quite right. >It's currently in the crypto tree after Herbert Xu picked it up. >It is scheduled to be merged into 4.6 at the moment. wonderful, sure, in the next merge window is good. But there is a little difference between your patch and mine. In your case they were build warnings, now with gcc-5 as default (e.g. Debian, Ubuntu), they are errors, so I would give the patch merge a speedup... but who am I to give suggestions to kernel folks? :) I can use the patch locally, and wait for the next release (actually I'm using it on iMX6 machines, so I have to backport this kind of patches anyway) >The mail is not formatted in a way that allows being imported with >'git am'. The best way to do this right is to use the headers >as they come from git format-patch directly, and start the mail with >the changelog text (and with a From: line before that). I did a git format-patch -1 commitid, from the source tree. The mail client (Thunderbird) has been configured with the documentation in the source tree, but I think it failed to not wrap the lines :) (I also have used git send-email or something similar some months ago, maybe I could have just used it) >Here you have kept my Signed-off-by line, but not the author attribution. >This is easy to get wrong. You probably want to change the author >field using 'git commit --amend --author="Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de>"', >which will cause the correct From: line to show up when exporting it >with git send-email. I know really good git, but I left it that way, because actually the patch was different from your one, and I don't want people blaming you instead of me. (not sure if the right approach, I thought the signoff was something nice, but probably I agree it is even worse) >You have marked the function as 'static' here, rather than 'static inline' >as I did in my patch. I think my version is better here, because it matches >the definition of the function, and because declaring a function as >'static' in a header file is generally a bad idea: you will get a build >warning or error if the header is included in a file that does not provide >a definition. true story, bad copy paste from commits aeea3592a13bf12861943e44fc48f1f270941f8d 76ae03828756bac2c1fa2c7eff7485e5f815dbdb I'll try to make it right the next time! thanks for the explanation, I patch kernel almost daily, I hope to contribute to it in the near future. cheers, Gianfranco
