2020-05-19 11:17:14

by Tang Bin

Subject: [PATCH] net/amd: Remove the extra blank lines

Remove the extra blank lines in the file au1000_eth.c

Signed-off-by: Zhang Shengju <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tang Bin <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/amd/au1000_eth.c | 5 -----
1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/au1000_eth.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/au1000_eth.c
index 75e9074d8..7988e7df1 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/au1000_eth.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/au1000_eth.c
@@ -243,7 +243,6 @@ MODULE_VERSION(DRV_VERSION);
* ps: make sure the used irqs are configured properly in the board
* specific irq-map
*/
-
static void au1000_enable_mac(struct net_device *dev, int force_reset)
{
unsigned long flags;
@@ -558,7 +557,6 @@ static int au1000_mii_probe(struct net_device *dev)
return 0;
}

-
/*
* Buffer allocation/deallocation routines. The buffer descriptor returned
* has the virtual and dma address of a buffer suitable for
@@ -608,7 +606,6 @@ static void au1000_reset_mac_unlocked(struct net_device *dev)
}

aup->mac_enabled = 0;
-
}

static void au1000_reset_mac(struct net_device *dev)
@@ -649,7 +646,6 @@ au1000_setup_hw_rings(struct au1000_private *aup, void __iomem *tx_base)
/*
* ethtool operations
*/
-
static void
au1000_get_drvinfo(struct net_device *dev, struct ethtool_drvinfo *info)
{
@@ -682,7 +678,6 @@ static const struct ethtool_ops au1000_ethtool_ops = {
.set_link_ksettings = phy_ethtool_set_link_ksettings,
};

-
/*
* Initialize the interface.
*
--
2.20.1.windows.1

2020-05-19 22:45:56

by David Miller

Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/amd: Remove the extra blank lines

Please put these patches into a proper, numbered, patch series with
an appropriate header posting.

Some of these patches do not apply cleanly to the net-next tree, which
is where these changes should be targetted. Please respin.

Thank you.

2020-05-19 23:22:57

by Tang Bin

Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/amd: Remove the extra blank lines

Hi David:

On 2020/5/20 6:42, David Miller wrote:
> Please put these patches into a proper, numbered, patch series with
> an appropriate header posting.
Whether you mean the patches should be like this: [PATCH 0/5].........?
>
> Some of these patches do not apply cleanly to the net-next tree, which
> is where these changes should be targetted. Please respin.

Can you tell me which one is useless, I will drop and not put it in the
patches set.

Thanks,

Tang Bin