[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] staging: erofs: use explicit unsigned int type
Hi Thomas,

On 2018/9/11 3:41, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Hi Chao,
> On Mon, 2018-09-10T23:59+0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> I was not aware of this tree and worked off of staging / next.
>>>> A patch is attached to this message that adds the tree to the MAINTAINERS file.
>>> Hi Chao,
>>> I think this tree has some PREVIEW patches which preview in linux-erofs mailing list only and
>>> doesn't send to staging mailing list and LKML,
>>> so erofs tree is actually Greg's staging tree.
>> Thomas,
>> I confirmed that erofs git repository for linux upstream is Greg's staging tree.
>> Let me explain, in order to avoid sending buggy or preview patch, Xiang and me
>> plan to review patches in erofs mailing list first, and then cache reviewed
>> patches in my git tree before sending them to Greg and staging mailing list.
>> Based on that, I'm trying to serialize all erofs patches, expecting that can
>> help those patches sent to staging mailing list can be merged by Greg with
>> lesser conflict. But I made a mistake that my erofs branch has merged some
>> pending patches, result in failing to merge yours, that mislead me to ask you to
>> rebase the code, sorry about that.
> Thank you for clearing this up! And I am sorry for causing you all this work
> for what is essentially a very small style cleanup.
>> Now I can confirm that your v2 patch can apply on Greg's staging-next, so fixing
>> warning reported by on your v2 patch is enough. :)
> The patch follows.
> Thomas

Could you please resend your patch seperately? Because it will be easier for Greg to merge.

> Changes since v1:
> * Removed changes that conflicted with
> [PATCH 1/6] staging: erofs: formatting fix in unzip_vle_lz4.c
> * Added patch description
> Changes since v2:
> * Fixed conflicts with other patchsets
> * Don't introduce new style issues
> Changes since v3:
> * Fixed conflicts with other patchsets
> Note: This patchset should be applied with the "git am --scissors", to
> remove the historic information and this note.
> -- >8 --

I personally think that is not the correct kernel patch style.

Just as Greg's said,
> These changes belong below the --- line, not above it.


For reference, it will help the patch quickly get merged. ;)

and you could add,
Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang <>

Gao Xiang

> Fix coding style issue "Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned'"
> detected by
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <>

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-12 08:23    [W:2.562 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site