On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 20:58:51 -0500 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Cc: "David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: Emil Medve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: Li Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > > > drivers/net/ucc_geth.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff -puN > > drivers/net/ucc_geth.c~ucc_geth-fix-build-break-introduced-by-commit-09f75cd7bf13720738e6a196cc0107ce9a5bd5a0-checkpatch-fixes > > drivers/net/ucc_geth.c > > --- > > a/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c~ucc_geth-fix-build-break-introduced-by-commit-09f75cd7bf13720738e6a196cc0107ce9a5bd5a0-checkpatch-fixes > > +++ a/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c > > @@ -3443,7 +3443,7 @@ static int ucc_geth_rx(struct ucc_geth_p > > u16 length, howmany = 0; > > u32 bd_status; > > u8 *bdBuffer; > > - struct net_device * dev; > > + struct net_device *dev; > > ACK with a fixed description... > Well... I do these little fixups a) to remind originators that they should be checking their stuff with checkpatch b) to fold into the offending base patch prior to sending upstream c) to let upstream (in this case you) know that the patch had coding-style problems. as it appears that you merged the base patch without noticing the error, and without running checkpatch I don't think it's worth merging a silly one-liner like this on its own. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
