From: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
Return the value iproc_pcie_setup_ib() directly instead of storing it in
another redundant variable.
Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
---
drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c
index 2519201b0e51..bd32929ab265 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c
@@ -1244,7 +1244,6 @@ static int iproce_pcie_get_msi(struct iproc_pcie *pcie,
static int iproc_pcie_paxb_v2_msi_steer(struct iproc_pcie *pcie, u64 msi_addr)
{
- int ret;
struct resource_entry entry;
memset(&entry, 0, sizeof(entry));
@@ -1254,8 +1253,7 @@ static int iproc_pcie_paxb_v2_msi_steer(struct iproc_pcie *pcie, u64 msi_addr)
entry.res->start = msi_addr;
entry.res->end = msi_addr + SZ_32K - 1;
- ret = iproc_pcie_setup_ib(pcie, &entry, IPROC_PCIE_IB_MAP_IO);
- return ret;
+ return iproc_pcie_setup_ib(pcie, &entry, IPROC_PCIE_IB_MAP_IO);
}
static void iproc_pcie_paxc_v2_msi_steer(struct iproc_pcie *pcie, u64 msi_addr,
--
2.25.1
On 9/6/2022 12:16 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> From: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
>
> Return the value iproc_pcie_setup_ib() directly instead of storing it in
> another redundant variable.
>
> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <[email protected]>
--
Florian
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 07:16:36AM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> From: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
>
> Return the value iproc_pcie_setup_ib() directly instead of storing it in
> another redundant variable.
>
> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
This patch itself is fine, but was posted by [email protected], not by
"ye xingchen <[email protected]>", so it needs another signoff
and full name so the chain is complete. For more details see:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=v5.18#n363
Bjorn
On 9/6/2022 2:27 PM, Scott Branden wrote:
>
>
> On 2022-09-06 14:25, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 07:16:36AM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
>>> From: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Return the value iproc_pcie_setup_ib() directly instead of storing it in
>>> another redundant variable.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
>>> Signed-off-by: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
>>
>> This patch itself is fine,
> Does the patch serve any real use though?
Not really though if we don't accept it, then someone else will submit a
similar patch later, since it is obviously correct, might as well accept it?
--
Florian
On 2022-09-06 14:25, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 07:16:36AM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
>> From: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
>>
>> Return the value iproc_pcie_setup_ib() directly instead of storing it in
>> another redundant variable.
>>
>> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
>
> This patch itself is fine,
Does the patch serve any real use though?
but was posted by [email protected], not by
> "ye xingchen <[email protected]>", so it needs another signoff
> and full name so the chain is complete. For more details see:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=v5.18#n363
>
> Bjorn
In fact,‘[email protected]’ is our company's public mail address, and ‘[email protected]’is my personal mail address in the company.‘ZTE’ is the name of company, and ‘CGEL’the name of our project team in company.This patch was posted by ‘[email protected]’.
For some reason, the patchs needs to be reviewed by the company before it is sent out, and we have to use public mailboxes to send mails, because personal mailboxes are not allowed to send mails.
Because it is the patch I submitted, the mail about the patch will be sent to my personal mailbox through the public mailbox.
Thanks,
YE XINGCHEN
[+Greg]
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 04:25:20PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 07:16:36AM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> > From: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
> >
> > Return the value iproc_pcie_setup_ib() directly instead of storing it in
> > another redundant variable.
> >
> > Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
>
> This patch itself is fine, but was posted by [email protected], not by
> "ye xingchen <[email protected]>", so it needs another signoff
> and full name so the chain is complete. For more details see:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=v5.18#n363
Greg, Bjorn,
I believe that appending a SoB like this myself is fine:
Signed-off-by: CGEL ZTE <[email protected]>
It is a SOB already in kernel commit logs - I assume
that's the right thing to do in this case, please
let me know if it isn't and what should we do instead.
Thanks,
Lorenzo
> Bjorn
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 02:07:52PM +0200, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> [+Greg]
>
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 04:25:20PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 07:16:36AM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> > > From: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Return the value iproc_pcie_setup_ib() directly instead of storing it in
> > > another redundant variable.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: ye xingchen <[email protected]>
> >
> > This patch itself is fine, but was posted by [email protected], not by
> > "ye xingchen <[email protected]>", so it needs another signoff
> > and full name so the chain is complete. For more details see:
> >
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=v5.18#n363
>
> Greg, Bjorn,
>
> I believe that appending a SoB like this myself is fine:
>
> Signed-off-by: CGEL ZTE <[email protected]>
>
> It is a SOB already in kernel commit logs - I assume
> that's the right thing to do in this case, please
> let me know if it isn't and what should we do instead.
Please just drop all patches submitted by this email address and from
zte.com.cn at this point in time as we are unable to actually determine
that they are coming from the correct developers.
Also there's no feedback from them at all, which means no one is
actually reading the email it is being purported to be sent from, which
means it should be dropped no matter what anyway.
thanks,
greg k-h