From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757834AbdCUP7h (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:59:37 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f173.google.com ([209.85.192.173]:34511 "EHLO mail-pf0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757508AbdCUP7W (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:59:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:59:18 -0700 From: Brian Norris To: Kalle Valo Cc: Amitkumar Karwar , Nishant Sarmukadam , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rajat Jain Subject: Re: [4/4] mwifiex: pcie: de-duplicate buffer allocation code Message-ID: <20170321155916.GA95754@google.com> References: <20170311013924.73348-5-briannorris@chromium.org> <20170320170835.5ED1C609C6@smtp.codeaurora.org> <20170320200550.GA12143@google.com> <874lym7roy.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <874lym7roy.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:14:05PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote: > Brian Norris writes: > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 05:08:35PM +0000, Kalle Valo wrote: > >> Failed to apply: > >> > >> fatal: sha1 information is lacking or useless > >> (drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/pcie.c). > >> error: could not build fake ancestor > >> Applying: mwifiex: pcie: de-duplicate buffer allocation code > >> Patch failed at 0001 mwifiex: pcie: de-duplicate buffer allocation code > >> The copy of the patch that failed is found in: .git/rebase-apply/patch > >> > >> Patch set to Changes Requested. > > > > This applies fine to your wireless-drivers/master branch for me, where > > patches 1-3 were applied. Are you applying this to > > wireless-drivers-next? It's quite understandable that patch 4 wouldn't > > apply there, as you've stripped out the previous patches... > > I (wrongly) understood that patches 1-3 are for 4.11 and patch 4 is for > 4.12, don't remember anymore how I got that impression. But I don't Well, you're not exactly wrong. I mentioned in the cover letter that the first 3 are bugfixes (probably for 4.11) and the 4th is not. > think a cleanup patch like this is justified for 4.11 so I'm not > comfortable applying this to wireless-drivers (which should only contain > fixes to important bugs or regressions). Right. > What I could do is to wait for the patches 1-3 trickle down to w-d-next > and then apply this patch. It usually takes few weeks, but with bad luck > it might happen only after the merge window. Would that work? Yeah, I figured something like that would happen. Seems fine to me. Brian