[openib-general] [PATCH] Use time_after_eq() instead of time_after() in queue_req()

[Roland Dreier]

 > Roland, this looks good for 2.6.20.  How would you like to handle
 > pulling in patches like these?  Once OFA has git up, would it be
 > easier to pull them into my git tree, then request that you pull from
 > there, or does this work okay?

Git pulls are definitely the easiest, but I'm fine with applying
patches from email too (git has good tools for that).  However it does
make my life easier if the patch applies cleanly.  In this case I had
the following problems (I applied it to for-2.6.20 anyway):

 > [PATCH] Use time_after_eq() instead of time_after() in queue_req()

Please add something like "RDMA/addr: " before the "Use" there, so
that someone skimming the kernel log knows what subsystem/specific
area the patch touches.  (I added that by hand)

 > --------

Git just wants three -s like "---" between changelog entry and actual patch.

 > diff -ruNp org/drivers/infiniband/core/addr.c new/drivers/infiniband/core/addr.c
 > --- org/drivers/infiniband/core/addr.c	2006-10-09 16:54:37.000000000 +0530
 > +++ new/drivers/infiniband/core/addr.c	2006-10-09 16:55:36.000000000 +0530
 > @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static void queue_req(struct addr_req *r
 >  
 >  	mutex_lock(&lock);
 >  	list_for_each_entry_reverse(temp_req, &req_list, list) {
 > -		if (time_after(req->timeout, temp_req->timeout))
 > +		if (time_after_eq(req->timeout, temp_req->timeout))
 >  			break;
 >  	}
 > 

the last line in the original mail was blank, when it should have a
single space.  This makes git complain (correctly) about a corrupt
patch.  Please make sure your mailer doesn't corrupt whitespace.

 - R.