On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 15:24:27 -0700 Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 02:51:40PM -0700, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:51:05 +0200 > > Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > If !mem_node we did already return -ENOMEM above in the function. > > > > > > Spotted by the Coverity checker. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Greg - you are listed as the maintainer for this driver. > > Not anymore, look at 2.6.23-rc1 :) > > > Can you either > > point me to someone who can review this patch or review it yourself? > > Looking at the code, it looks like it's possible that the driver writer > > wanted this code patch to be able to be taken if it got IO resources > > and not MEM resources, and if they didn't there's other cleanups that > > should be done for the no iomem case. > > Hm, I agree that this looks like the way the code was intended to work, > but as this code has been working just fine so far the way it is, I'm > not inclined to change it much, if any. > > Especially as I no longer even have the hardware to test it on :( > > So, how about we just leave it alone? > > thanks, > > greg k-h >
fine by me - let's NAK this patch (and all future ones for this driver) until someone with hardware steps up to maintain this driver. Eventually it will just die I guess. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
