]
static int musb_run_resume_work(struct musb *musb)
^~~~
Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure
---
I think that adding a preprocessor condition is a better way to fix this than
moving the function into the scope of the existing condition to preserve the
git history
I found three functions in blackfin.c defined but not used in some
configurations. These patches fix these compilation warnings.
[PATCH 1/2] usb: musb: blackfin: fix unused warnings on suspend/resume
[PATCH 2/2] usb: musb: blackfin: add bfin_fifo_offset in bfin_ops
--
To unsubscribe from this list
t(u8 epnum)
^~~~
Adding bfin_fifo_offset to bfin_ops fixes this warning and allows musb
core to call this function instead of default_fifo_offset.
Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure
---
drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c b/driver
__maybe_unused.
Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure
---
drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c | 6 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c b/drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c
index 310238c6b5cd..f43edc43268b 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb
Hi Bin,
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Bin Liu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 07:19:39PM -0500, Jérémy Lefaure wrote:
> > When CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is disabled, SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS does not use
> > bfin_resume and bfin_suspend even if CONFIG_PM is enabled:
> >
> > d
From: Jérémy Lefaure
The function bfin_fifo_offset is defined but not used:
drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c:36:12: warning: ‘bfin_fifo_offset’ defined
but not used [-Wunused-function]
static u32 bfin_fifo_offset(u8 epnum)
^~~~
Adding bfin_fifo_offset to bfin_ops fixes
On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 14:56:00 -0600
Bin Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 07:19:39PM -0500, Jérémy Lefaure wrote:
> > When CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is disabled, SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS does not use
> > bfin_resume and bfin_suspend even if CONFIG_PM is enabled:
> >
> > drivers
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:01:31 +1100
"Tobin C. Harding" wrote:
> > In order to reduce the size of the To: and Cc: lines, each patch of the
> > series is sent only to the maintainers and lists concerned by the patch.
> > This cover letter is sent to every list concerned by this series.
>
> Why don
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 15:22:24 -0400
bfie...@fieldses.org (J. Bruce Fields) wrote:
> Mainly I'd just like to know which you're asking for. Do you want me to
> apply this, or to ACK it so someone else can? If it's sent as a series
> I tend to assume the latter.
>
> But in this case I'm assuming it'
On Mon, 02 Oct 2017 16:46:29 +0300
Kalle Valo wrote:
> We have a tree for wireless so usually it's better to submit wireless
> changes on their own but here I assume Dave will apply this to his tree.
> If not, please resubmit the wireless part in a separate patch.
Ok, I note that.
I'll wait Dave
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 16:07:36 +0300
Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > + {&gainctrl_lut_core0_rev0, ARRAY_SIZE(gainctrl_lut_core0_rev0), 26,
> > 192,
> > +32},
>
> For all such cases I would rather put on one line disregard checkpatch
> warning for better readability.
I agree that it woul
Hi everyone,
Using ARRAY_SIZE improves the code readability. I used coccinelle (I
made a change to the array_size.cocci file [1]) to find several places
where ARRAY_SIZE could be used instead of other macros or sizeof
division.
I tried to divide the changes into a patch per subsystem (excepted for
/sizeof(*E))
|
(sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(E[...]))
|
(sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(T))
)
Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure
---
drivers/net/ethernet/emulex/benet/be_cmds.c| 4 +-
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_adminq.h | 3 +-
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40evf/i40e_adminq.h| 3
13 matches
Mail list logo
