linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Impact video driver for SGI Indigo2

To: post@pfrst.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Impact video driver for SGI Indigo2
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@mvista.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:38:38 +0400
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1109131101530.4143@Indigo2.Peter>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1109131101530.4143@Indigo2.Peter>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
Hello.

On 13-09-2011 13:39, peter fuerst wrote:

Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:56:36 +0400
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@mvista.com>
To: post@pfrst.de
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org,
attilio.fiandrotti@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Impact video driver for SGI Indigo2

...
framebuffer device. Without the support of PCI & AGP.

It looks like the patch is spoiled as I'm seeing two spaces at the start
of line when looking at the message source.

hmmm, that's a strange problem. The two spaces are not in the diff-file
read into the eMail and are not displayed by the MUA (pine 4.64). But

Indeed, they're not displayed (though due to "format=flowed" the patch is not diasplyed correctly for me anyway).

indeed, where's a leading space in the diff, there's an additional space
inserted into the eMail-body. Have to find out the best way to suppress
this behaviour...


...

There are alos empty lines after each file in the patch -- which
shouldn't be there.

These were intended for readability (reviewability :), but i can remove
them easily (of course).

   These will prevent the patch from applying, AFAIK.

diff --git a/drivers/video/Makefile b/drivers/video/Makefile
...

The above should be a part of the driver patch, as you can't add Makefile
targets fow which no source files exist yet.

Do you suggest to submit the ip22-setup.c-, impact.h-, impact.c-parts
alone in a first patch and then,

No, I suggest putting drivers/video/impact.* and drivers/video/*Kconfig and drivers/video/Makefile in one patch and leaving ip22-setup.c in another one -- the driver should be separate from the platform code IMO. The defconfig change should also be a patch of it's own, IMO.

in a separate follow-up patch, the
Kconfig- and Makefile-parts, or just to reorder the parts in this single
patch?

   No, not reorder.

with kind regards

peter

WBR, Sergei

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>