On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 09:57:31AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:04:22PM -0500, nick wrote:
quoted
Greetings Sudip and others,
After doing a clean kernel build today I get this warning:
drivers/staging/sm7xxfb/sm7xxfb.c:117:19: warning: ‘sm7xx_vga_setup’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
static int __init sm7xx_vga_setup(char *options).
After looking into it further I found it's not being called anywhere, I was going to remove it until I
found out it was used for command processing by this driver for setup of cards supported. I was wondering
if this function is still needed due to legacy support or to allow this command line processing feature to
be used still.
Hi Nick,
I was under the impression that you have been blacklisted from lkml.
He is, you got the email directly, it never made it to vger.
I suggest updating your personal blacklist as well, it makes things
easier.
greg k-h
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:04:22PM -0500, nick wrote:
Greetings Sudip and others,
After doing a clean kernel build today I get this warning:
drivers/staging/sm7xxfb/sm7xxfb.c:117:19: warning: ‘sm7xx_vga_setup’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
static int __init sm7xx_vga_setup(char *options).
After looking into it further I found it's not being called anywhere, I was going to remove it until I
found out it was used for command processing by this driver for setup of cards supported. I was wondering
if this function is still needed due to legacy support or to allow this command line processing feature to
be used still.
Hi Nick,
I was under the impression that you have been blacklisted from lkml.
anyways, as of now this function is not used, but my next set of patch will use that and it will be sent to Greg as soon as he applies my pending patches with him.
regards
sudip
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 08:33:41PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 09:57:31AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
I suggest updating your personal blacklist as well, it makes things
easier.
yes, better. and i was just seeing some of his patches, mostly all are removing of FIXME comments.
but i got confused with bab5bb398273bb37547a185f7b344b37c700d0b9
he has removed a call to function kvm_make_request() and introduced a new function kvm_set_pending_timer() which is just calling kvm_make_request(). and the commit message just says "Adds a function kvm_vcpu_set_pending_timer instead of calling kvm_make_request in lapic.c." , i am just unable to understand why this change?
regards
sudip
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:44:00AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 08:33:41PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 09:57:31AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
I suggest updating your personal blacklist as well, it makes things
easier.
yes, better. and i was just seeing some of his patches, mostly all are removing of FIXME comments.
but i got confused with bab5bb398273bb37547a185f7b344b37c700d0b9
he has removed a call to function kvm_make_request() and introduced a new function kvm_set_pending_timer() which is just calling kvm_make_request(). and the commit message just says "Adds a function kvm_vcpu_set_pending_timer instead of calling kvm_make_request in lapic.c." , i am just unable to understand why this change?
I don't understand the change either, I suggest asking the kvmm
developer who accepted it.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 08:48:00AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:44:00AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 08:33:41PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 09:57:31AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
I suggest updating your personal blacklist as well, it makes things
easier.
yes, better. and i was just seeing some of his patches, mostly all are removing of FIXME comments.
but i got confused with bab5bb398273bb37547a185f7b344b37c700d0b9
he has removed a call to function kvm_make_request() and introduced a new function kvm_set_pending_timer() which is just calling kvm_make_request(). and the commit message just says "Adds a function kvm_vcpu_set_pending_timer instead of calling kvm_make_request in lapic.c." , i am just unable to understand why this change?
I don't understand the change either, I suggest asking the kvmm
developer who accepted it.
Hi Paolo,
We have a small confusion about commit bab5bb398273bb37547a185f7b344b37c700d0b9. It looks like the patch removed a call to function kvm_make_request() and introduced a new function kvm_set_pending_timer() which is just calling kvm_make_request() again. and the commit message just says "Adds a function kvm_vcpu_set_pending_timer instead of calling kvm_make_request in lapic.c.".
regards
sudip
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Date: 2015-02-27 15:22:15
On 27/02/2015 16:14, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
quoted
quoted
I don't understand the change either, I suggest asking the kvmm
developer who accepted it.
Hi Paolo, We have a small confusion about commit
bab5bb398273bb37547a185f7b344b37c700d0b9. It looks like the patch
removed a call to function kvm_make_request() and introduced a new
function kvm_set_pending_timer() which is just calling
kvm_make_request() again. and the commit message just says "Adds a
function kvm_vcpu_set_pending_timer instead of calling
kvm_make_request in lapic.c.".
It's just a cosmetic change; and yes, I know who the author is.
Paolo