max_payload is unused.
Signed-off-by: Bongsu Jeon <[email protected]>
---
drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/core.c | 3 +--
drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c | 4 +---
drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/s3fwrn5.h | 3 +--
3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/core.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/core.c
index ba6c486d6465..f8e5d78d9078 100644
--- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/core.c
+++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/core.c
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ static struct nci_ops s3fwrn5_nci_ops = {
};
int s3fwrn5_probe(struct nci_dev **ndev, void *phy_id, struct device *pdev,
- const struct s3fwrn5_phy_ops *phy_ops, unsigned int max_payload)
+ const struct s3fwrn5_phy_ops *phy_ops)
{
struct s3fwrn5_info *info;
int ret;
@@ -148,7 +148,6 @@ int s3fwrn5_probe(struct nci_dev **ndev, void *phy_id, struct device *pdev,
info->phy_id = phy_id;
info->pdev = pdev;
info->phy_ops = phy_ops;
- info->max_payload = max_payload;
mutex_init(&info->mutex);
s3fwrn5_set_mode(info, S3FWRN5_MODE_COLD);
diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c
index dc995286be84..0ffa389066a0 100644
--- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c
+++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/i2c.c
@@ -19,7 +19,6 @@
#define S3FWRN5_I2C_DRIVER_NAME "s3fwrn5_i2c"
-#define S3FWRN5_I2C_MAX_PAYLOAD 32
#define S3FWRN5_EN_WAIT_TIME 150
struct s3fwrn5_i2c_phy {
@@ -248,8 +247,7 @@ static int s3fwrn5_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
- ret = s3fwrn5_probe(&phy->ndev, phy, &phy->i2c_dev->dev, &i2c_phy_ops,
- S3FWRN5_I2C_MAX_PAYLOAD);
+ ret = s3fwrn5_probe(&phy->ndev, phy, &phy->i2c_dev->dev, &i2c_phy_ops);
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/s3fwrn5.h b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/s3fwrn5.h
index ede68bb5eeae..9d5f34759225 100644
--- a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/s3fwrn5.h
+++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/s3fwrn5.h
@@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ struct s3fwrn5_info {
struct device *pdev;
const struct s3fwrn5_phy_ops *phy_ops;
- unsigned int max_payload;
struct s3fwrn5_fw_info fw_info;
@@ -79,7 +78,7 @@ static inline int s3fwrn5_write(struct s3fwrn5_info *info, struct sk_buff *skb)
}
int s3fwrn5_probe(struct nci_dev **ndev, void *phy_id, struct device *pdev,
- const struct s3fwrn5_phy_ops *phy_ops, unsigned int max_payload);
+ const struct s3fwrn5_phy_ops *phy_ops);
void s3fwrn5_remove(struct nci_dev *ndev);
int s3fwrn5_recv_frame(struct nci_dev *ndev, struct sk_buff *skb,
--
2.17.1
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 10:16:11AM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote:
> max_payload is unused.
Why did you resend the patch ignoring my review? I already provided you
with a tag, so you should include it.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
Best regards,
Krzysztof
2020-11-17 16:42 GMT+09:00, [email protected] <[email protected]>:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 10:16:11AM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote:
>> max_payload is unused.
>
> Why did you resend the patch ignoring my review? I already provided you
> with a tag, so you should include it.
>
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
>
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Sorry about that. I included the tag.
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 at 09:14, Bongsu Jeon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> 2020-11-17 16:42 GMT+09:00, [email protected] <[email protected]>:
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 10:16:11AM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote:
> >> max_payload is unused.
> >
> > Why did you resend the patch ignoring my review? I already provided you
> > with a tag, so you should include it.
> >
> > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof
> >
>
> Sorry about that. I included the tag.
You need to reduce the rate of sending new patches. You sent v1. Then
you sent again v1, which I reviewed. Then you send v2 without my
review. So I provided a review. Then you sent again a v2 with my
reviewed tags. So there are two v1 patches and two v2. Since I
provided you the review tags for v2, no need to send v2 again. It
confuses.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 5:39 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 at 09:14, Bongsu Jeon <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > 2020-11-17 16:42 GMT+09:00, [email protected] <[email protected]>:
> > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 10:16:11AM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote:
> > >> max_payload is unused.
> > >
> > > Why did you resend the patch ignoring my review? I already provided you
> > > with a tag, so you should include it.
> > >
> > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Krzysztof
> > >
> >
> > Sorry about that. I included the tag.
>
> You need to reduce the rate of sending new patches. You sent v1. Then
> you sent again v1, which I reviewed. Then you send v2 without my
> review. So I provided a review. Then you sent again a v2 with my
> reviewed tags. So there are two v1 patches and two v2. Since I
> provided you the review tags for v2, no need to send v2 again. It
> confuses.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Sorry to confuse you.
I made a mistake because I thought that you asked me
to resend the patches with the new version(v2).
I think you intended that I need to version the patches and
describe changes when I update the patches next time.
Thanks a lot for reviewing my patches.