From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-we0-f170.google.com ([74.125.82.170]:51686 "EHLO mail-we0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752758AbbAXNYY (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Jan 2015 08:24:24 -0500 Received: by mail-we0-f170.google.com with SMTP id x3so2045353wes.1 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2015 05:24:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: sedat.dilek@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <873870iaj7.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> References: <1422099243-20321-1-git-send-email-hong@topbug.net> <873870iaj7.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 14:24:22 +0100 Message-ID: (sfid-20150124_142427_103594_F926F43B) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ath9k and ath9k_htc: rename variable "led_blink" From: Sedat Dilek To: Kalle Valo Cc: Hong Xu , wireless Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Sedat Dilek writes: > >> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Hong Xu wrote: >>> ath9k and ath9k_htc use the variable name "led_blink" to indicate >>> whether the module parameter "blink" is on. This name is easy to >>> conflict with other variables, and has caused a compiler error found >>> by kbuild test bot. The compiler error is as following: >>> >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ath9k_htc.o:(.data+0x47c): multiple definition of `led_blink' >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ath9k.o:(.bss+0x20): first defined here >>> >>> Fixes: 3a939a671225 ("ath9k_htc: Add a module parameter to disable blink") >>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot >>> Signed-off-by: Hong Xu >>> --- >>> Compared to previous versions, the commit message is improved to fit >>> the contribution guideline (again). >>> --- >> >> This looks good. > > Indeed. > >> I have one thing for followers of (linux-wireless) mailing-lists in >> general. If your patch is against a special Git tree, please add a >> "subject-prefix" and/or put a note in the commit-body. For example: >> "This patch is against wireless-drivers-next or linux-next >> (next-2015-01-23)." This is very helpful. > > I don't think that's necessary as by default driver patches go to > wireless-drivers-next. But if the patch should go to an -rc release for > whatever (good) reasons it's best to mark the patch like "[PATCH 3.19]" > or similar, that way I can easily see that it should go to 3.19. Larry > does that and it's really helpful. > OK, that is helpful for rc-fixes (and I used that). But how to distinguish when this is not a rc-fix but for wireless-drivers-next (to fix a breakage like here)... Label with "[PATCH 3.20]"? For you as a daily reader/follower this might be clear, but not for me and maybe others. Please, also look at netdev ML (patches for net.git/net-next.git). - Sedat -