On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 05:46:41PM +0900, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:28:49AM -0400, [email protected] wrote:
> > From: Jubin John <[email protected]>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jubin John <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/common.h | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/common.h
> > b/drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/common.h
> > index 7809093eb55e..5dd92720faae 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/common.h
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/rdma/hfi1/common.h
> > @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@
> > * to the driver itself, not the software interfaces it supports.
> > */
> > #ifndef HFI1_DRIVER_VERSION_BASE
> > -#define HFI1_DRIVER_VERSION_BASE "0.9-248"
> > +#define HFI1_DRIVER_VERSION_BASE "0.9-294"
>
> Patches like this make no sense at all, please drop it and only use the
> kernel version.
What do you mean by "only use the kernel version"? Do you mean
#define HFI1_DRIVER_VERSION_BASE UTS_RELEASE
Or just remove the macro entirely?
>
> Trust me, it's going to get messy really fast (hint, it
> already did...)
Did I base this on the wrong tree? Not sure how this could have messed you up.
Thanks,
Ira
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
