On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 3:25 PM Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 03:09:59PM -0700, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > Should I undo this? I want my patch against next since it's targeting
> > some stuff in-flight over there. BUT, I also want ethtool_puts() to be
> > directly below ethtool_s
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 3:09 PM Justin Stitt wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 3:02 PM Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> >
> > Hi Justin,
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 09:56:07PM +, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > Use strscpy() to implement ethtool_puts().
> > >
> > > Functionally the same as ethtool_spr
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 3:02 PM Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> Hi Justin,
>
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 09:56:07PM +, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > Use strscpy() to implement ethtool_puts().
> >
> > Functionally the same as ethtool_sprintf() when it's used with two
> > arguments or with just "%s" format s
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 03:09:59PM -0700, Justin Stitt wrote:
> Should I undo this? I want my patch against next since it's targeting
> some stuff in-flight over there. BUT, I also want ethtool_puts() to be
> directly below ethtool_sprintf() in the source code. What to do?
(removing everyone excep
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 03:11:28PM -0700, Justin Stitt wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 3:09 PM Justin Stitt wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 3:02 PM Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > Maybe this is due to an incorrect rebase conflict resolution, but you
> > > shouldn't have touched any of the ethtoo
Hi Justin,
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 09:56:07PM +, Justin Stitt wrote:
> Use strscpy() to implement ethtool_puts().
>
> Functionally the same as ethtool_sprintf() when it's used with two
> arguments or with just "%s" format specifier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Justin Stitt
> ---
> include/linux/eth
