From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA346C63777 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 05:41:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EA5022226 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 05:41:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="lFl6N3Dg" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389233AbgK0Fl3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:41:29 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36662 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729830AbgK0Fl3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:41:29 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-x144.google.com (mail-lf1-x144.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::144]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2685C0613D1; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:41:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x144.google.com with SMTP id d8so5432694lfa.1; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:41:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jTbdJPLCPCmKC1sQucjkCurKOKfvRNOl0rPRqRFsYFs=; b=lFl6N3Dg+QQ82za+rkFQ0TN+wf6XTCAJuruvQ/rrIsW+JH+D44/zJlOW3SqcRKZIzT lrRUUZPKbtB2kqYAq+AG/QGqZnD3PXXa8rUpw0vPmd3QOKe8zCEtDvYkazvF7Y4BEMAL 9uMKD7Um+UjqidjIlmJB1Gz24rF2LRwt89wKJlaBEOvo5X67mE2q44rxEr+e0Gzfr8P8 Km+FaG/xOR4VkuWgezqfjuDohMKNDO928+38/BHAOd2G36s7mO7/NdYODdGc5YzNI4qd j7Mmc3ReOCJX5xWGgLsjyniTKsBTL7SfoyFF+ZZ6UJxdrXfpCVrG0BJWXM49wLTuMUWg LGqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jTbdJPLCPCmKC1sQucjkCurKOKfvRNOl0rPRqRFsYFs=; b=Rseq4T825vTcZ9fY5qZbdG86OABoDRlcwN33GBHkV3qpb+jsOSus7qTEUb1G6ErWRB BFGBbw9K69KnRw8BP5+gfAKRAvEhSg9ljkautRGI9q6U2oDTuM99wJt9sgJdDtQ8nTgq IK7whHO7pgsJINrbZF48N6qhqoxOFB5wOnJAt2fjFnikNixLwVWarriTnn4Vm4ZBdqeG AD9YaVz6y49nzS7vmjKtfF5Mb1+9dYFV4cN9lz53vz8v30+p9cm+S0InrGzTumSCh08z t/JnCA80m1gTLuC1AkDlEvaAWbNAC+3f9W3JIrawXsT47QRG5z7ozBKzNSMxcKSZErTj RxZg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530jLHLYZY1zpi299V3B9hv1ojZTytrwrSGUC7xzWZh3D4V5uS1c GFHLzU/tG7mwzwhDEs3Oxf6jn76lnFTlOHcKHxY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyAeMEzfdGrvJT9b5AUNWayhzIAW5+4r+WiiKzD3LJnSTc5sziUMYp+pVfE4rkRvctYI3pCNM0lKqC81E7N614= X-Received: by 2002:a19:f60e:: with SMTP id x14mr2458236lfe.199.1606455686176; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:41:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a9a:999:0:b029:97:eac4:b89e with HTTP; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:41:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1606404819-30647-1-git-send-email-bongsu.jeon@samsung.com> <20201126170154.GA4978@kozik-lap> From: Bongsu Jeon Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 14:41:25 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] nfc: s3fwrn5: use signed integer for parsing GPIO numbers To: krzk@kernel.org Cc: Krzysztof Opasiak , linux-nfc@lists.01.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/27/20, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 2:06 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com wrote: >> > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski >> > >> > GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - >> > are >> > signed integers, where negative number indicates error. The return >> > value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int >> > because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO. >> > >> > Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC >> > Chip") >> > Cc: >> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski >> >> Why do you send my patch? >> > > I think that your patch should be applied before refactoring for this > driver. > So, I applied your patch to net-next branch and included your patch at > my patch list. > Is this the wrong process? > Sorry to confuse you. I found your patch when i updated my workspace using git pull. >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4511937618640663345==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Bongsu Jeon To: linux-nfc@lists.01.org Subject: [linux-nfc] Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] nfc: s3fwrn5: use signed integer for parsing GPIO numbers Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 14:41:25 +0900 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: CAEx-X7esGyZ2QiTGbE1H7M7z1dqT47awmqrOtN+p0FbwtwfPOg@mail.gmail.com --===============4511937618640663345== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/27/20, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020@2:06 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020@12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com wrote: >> > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski >> > >> > GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - >> > are >> > signed integers, where negative number indicates error. The return >> > value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int >> > because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO. >> > >> > Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC >> > Chip") >> > Cc: >> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski >> >> Why do you send my patch? >> > > I think that your patch should be applied before refactoring for this > driver. > So, I applied your patch to net-next branch and included your patch at > my patch list. > Is this the wrong process? > Sorry to confuse you. I found your patch when i updated my workspace using git pull. >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > --===============4511937618640663345==-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3268824555476317129==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Bongsu Jeon To: linux-nfc@lists.01.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] nfc: s3fwrn5: use signed integer for parsing GPIO numbers Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 14:41:25 +0900 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: List-Id: --===============3268824555476317129== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/27/20, Bongsu Jeon wrote: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 2:06 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2(a)gmail.com wrote: >> > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski >> > >> > GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - >> > are >> > signed integers, where negative number indicates error. The return >> > value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int >> > because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO. >> > >> > Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC >> > Chip") >> > Cc: >> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski >> >> Why do you send my patch? >> > > I think that your patch should be applied before refactoring for this > driver. > So, I applied your patch to net-next branch and included your patch at > my patch list. > Is this the wrong process? > Sorry to confuse you. I found your patch when i updated my workspace using git pull. >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > --===============3268824555476317129==--