Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:41:36 +0200 | From | Ivajlo Dimitrov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Staging: TIDSPBRIDGE: Remove UUID helper |
| |
On 06.12.2013 17:10, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 08:05:38AM +0200, Ivajlo Dimitrov wrote: >> Hi Greg, >> >> On 01.12.2013 19:07, Ivaylo DImitrov wrote: >>> From: Ivaylo Dimitrov <freemangordon@abv.bg> >>> >>> Custom uuid helper function is needed only in rmgr/dbdcd.c and doesn't >>> need to be exported. It can also be made way simpler by using sscanf. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Ivaylo Dimitrov <freemangordon@abv.bg> >>> --- >>> drivers/staging/tidspbridge/Makefile | 2 +- >>> drivers/staging/tidspbridge/gen/uuidutil.c | 85 -------------------- >>> .../tidspbridge/include/dspbridge/uuidutil.h | 18 ---- >>> drivers/staging/tidspbridge/rmgr/dbdcd.c | 42 +++++++++- >>> 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 108 deletions(-) >>> delete mode 100644 drivers/staging/tidspbridge/gen/uuidutil.c >>> >> I guess the initial mail somehow didn't make it through your spam filter: >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/1/70 > It did, but I thought that people asked for it to be changed in the > thread afterwards, so I was expecting an updated version from you. > > Care to fix things up and resend it? > > thanks, > > greg k-h
Sure, the change I was asked for is trivial, but I didn't get the reason why it is needed. Neither there is a reply to my follow-up comment [0]. Sorry, I am pretty much new on LKML and could miss things that are supposed to be clear from the start, but my impression is that when someone says "it is better", he/she should explain why it is better or at least what is wrong with the patch he/she wants to be changed.
However, I don't want to enter some arguing loop, so if you think I should change the code as per Joe's comment, just confirm it and I'll do it.
Thanks, Ivo
[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/1/113
| |