Re: staging: pi433: Possible bug in rf69.c

[Marcus Wolf]

Hi Dan,

thanks fot the link. I can't remeber, why and what I wanted to redo. 
Maybe there was a complaint about the format of the patch...

In that patch, we also have the topic with the '>> 3', we were 
discussing a few days ago!

I'd suggest, not to invest the history any more. I'm ok with preparing a 
new patch/new patches, so we can import the fixes.

I also have several improvements for the rf69.c, I'd like to offer.

But I still need to know when to use staging and when to use linux-next.
I don't want to prepare patches for the wrong tree.

Cheers,

Marcus


Am 11.11.2017 um 10:45 schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 08:55:30AM +0100, Marcus Wolf wrote:
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > I checked it on my local SVN. You are right. I submitted the code with '&'.
> > Accodring to a check-in message on my SVN, there was a bugreport end of
> > July and most probably a patch - either from me, you, Joseph Wright,
> > Colin King or Julia Lawall, changing '&' to '|'. I guess the patch for
> > some reason wasn't accepted, but fortunatley I introduced the change to
> > my SVN.
>
> You sent the patch, but then talked about sending a new version so
> that's why it wasn't merged.  Greg probably would have merged it as-is
> if it hadn't sounded like you were going to redo it.
>
> http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/pipermail/driverdev-devel/2017-July/108821.html
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter