[PATCH 2/3 v2] hyperv: hyperv_fb.c: match wait_for_completion_timeout return type

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <redacted>
---

v2: fixed subject line

The return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not
int. This patch fixes up the declarations only.

Patch was compile tested only for x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_X86_VSMP=y
CONFIG_HYPERV=m, CONFIG_FB_HYPERV=m

Patch is against 3.19.0-rc5 -next-20150123

 drivers/video/fbdev/hyperv_fb.c |    6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/hyperv_fb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/hyperv_fb.c
index 4254336..807ee22 100644
--- a/drivers/video/fbdev/hyperv_fb.c
+++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/hyperv_fb.c

@@ -415,7 +415,8 @@ static int synthvid_negotiate_ver(struct hv_device *hdev, u32 ver)
 	struct fb_info *info = hv_get_drvdata(hdev);
 	struct hvfb_par *par = info->par;
 	struct synthvid_msg *msg = (struct synthvid_msg *)par->init_buf;
-	int t, ret = 0;
+	int ret = 0;
+	unsigned long t;
 
 	memset(msg, 0, sizeof(struct synthvid_msg));
 	msg->vid_hdr.type = SYNTHVID_VERSION_REQUEST;

@@ -488,7 +489,8 @@ static int synthvid_send_config(struct hv_device *hdev)
 	struct fb_info *info = hv_get_drvdata(hdev);
 	struct hvfb_par *par = info->par;
 	struct synthvid_msg *msg = (struct synthvid_msg *)par->init_buf;
-	int t, ret = 0;
+	int ret = 0;
+	unsigned long t;
 
 	/* Send VRAM location */
 	memset(msg, 0, sizeof(struct synthvid_msg));

-- 
1.7.10.4

Hi,

On 25/01/15 16:47, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <redacted>
---

v2: fixed subject line

The return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not
int. This patch fixes up the declarations only.

Patch was compile tested only for x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_X86_VSMP=y
CONFIG_HYPERV=m, CONFIG_FB_HYPERV=m

Why didn't you set the text above as the patch description (which is
empty at the moment)?

 Tomi

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

Hi,

On 25/01/15 16:47, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <redacted>
---

v2: fixed subject line

The return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not
int. This patch fixes up the declarations only.

Patch was compile tested only for x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_X86_VSMP=y
CONFIG_HYPERV=m, CONFIG_FB_HYPERV=m

Why didn't you set the text above as the patch description (which is
empty at the moment)?

basically because the one-line is sufficient to understand the patch
and the rest of the information is not relevant for the git log but only
for the review

if you think it is necessary to understand the patch I'll move it and
resubmit.

thanks for your review !

hofrat

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:38:39AM +0100, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 25/01/15 16:47, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <redacted>
---

v2: fixed subject line

The return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not
int. This patch fixes up the declarations only.

This line is relevant for the patch description.
 

quoted

quoted

Patch was compile tested only for x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_X86_VSMP=y
CONFIG_HYPERV=m, CONFIG_FB_HYPERV=m

This line is not relevant.

regards,
dan carpenter

On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, Dan Carpenter wrote:

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:38:39AM +0100, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 25/01/15 16:47, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <redacted>
---

v2: fixed subject line

The return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not
int. This patch fixes up the declarations only.

This line is relevant for the patch description.
 

quoted

quoted

quoted

Patch was compile tested only for x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_X86_VSMP=y
CONFIG_HYPERV=m, CONFIG_FB_HYPERV=m

This line is not relevant.

thanks - will resend it then - assumed that the one-line would do for this
patch.

thx!
hofrat 

On 29/01/15 11:38, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 25/01/15 16:47, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <redacted>
---

v2: fixed subject line

The return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not
int. This patch fixes up the declarations only.

Patch was compile tested only for x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_X86_VSMP=y
CONFIG_HYPERV=m, CONFIG_FB_HYPERV=m

Why didn't you set the text above as the patch description (which is
empty at the moment)?

basically because the one-line is sufficient to understand the patch

You didn't have one line, you had no description. Patch subject is not
patch description. In the minimal case, the description should have the
same text as the subject, but usually it's better to have a bit more
text in the description.

and the rest of the information is not relevant for the git log but only
for the review

if you think it is necessary to understand the patch I'll move it and
resubmit.

Well, a good description is not only about understanding the code in the
patch. It may contain information like which platform/setup this issue
happened on, are the any possible side effects, or whatever might be
relevant for someone looking at the patch years later.

 Tomi

On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

On 29/01/15 11:38, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 25/01/15 16:47, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <redacted>
---

v2: fixed subject line

The return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not
int. This patch fixes up the declarations only.

Patch was compile tested only for x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_X86_VSMP=y
CONFIG_HYPERV=m, CONFIG_FB_HYPERV=m

Why didn't you set the text above as the patch description (which is
empty at the moment)?

basically because the one-line is sufficient to understand the patch

You didn't have one line, you had no description. Patch subject is not
patch description. In the minimal case, the description should have the
same text as the subject, but usually it's better to have a bit more
text in the description.

ok - was not clear about this - got it.

quoted

and the rest of the information is not relevant for the git log but only
for the review

if you think it is necessary to understand the patch I'll move it and
resubmit.

Well, a good description is not only about understanding the code in the
patch. It may contain information like which platform/setup this issue
happened on, are the any possible side effects, or whatever might be
relevant for someone looking at the patch years later.

yup - but it seemed to me that the information on the build
config and kernel version details would not really be relevant for
this cleanup patch - so if I got your right the description line should
have gone up and the config/kernel info stays below "---".

Just resent it - hope this is correct now.

thx!
hofrat