Re: [PATCH] Simplify yenta code

2007-10-08 Thread Linas Vepstas
On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 01:26:01PM +0900, Komuro wrote: > Hello, > > Unfortunately, your patch is wrong, > and does not results in the same run-time behaviour. Yes, I thought I'd withdrawn it, as a monday-morning error. If that wasn't clear .. NAK to my own patch. --linas - To unsubscribe from t

RE: [PATCH] Simplify yenta code

2007-10-05 Thread Komuro
Hello, Unfortunately, your patch is wrong, and does not results in the same run-time behaviour. You broke the code of "if (type & IORESOURCE_IO)" Best Regards Komuro >Simplify some of the resource detection logic in yenta_socket. >This patch results in the same run-time behaviour as the >cu

Re: [PATCH] Simplify yenta code

2007-10-01 Thread Linas Vepstas
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 12:56:55PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > Are BRIDGE_IO_MAX and BRIDGE_MEM_MAX guaranteed to be the same? @#$%^&*. Red-faced, I withdraw the patch. Must be cross-eyed on a Monday morning. Sorry. --linas - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-k

Re: [PATCH] Simplify yenta code

2007-10-01 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 01:41:15PM -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote: > - if (type & IORESOURCE_IO) { > - if ((yenta_search_res(socket, res, BRIDGE_IO_MAX)) || > - (yenta_search_res(socket, res, BRIDGE_IO_ACC)) || > - (yenta_search_res(socket, res, BRIDGE_IO

[PATCH] Simplify yenta code

2007-10-01 Thread Linas Vepstas
Simplify some of the resource detection logic in yenta_socket. This patch results in the same run-time behaviour as the current code, but does so with fewer lines of code. This makes the logical flow of the code a bit easier to understand. Signed-off-by: Linas Vepstas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Dom