On 3 January 2014 17:53, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) tixy@linaro.org wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-23 at 18:19 +0200, Taras Kondratiuk wrote:
From: Ben Dooks ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk
Ensure we read instructions in the correct endian-ness by using the <asm/opcodes.h> helper to transform them as necessary.
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk [taras.kondratiuk@linaro.org: fix next_instruction() function] Signed-off-by: Taras Kondratiuk taras.kondratiuk@linaro.org
Apart from the spurious line removal (see below) then:
Acked-by: Jon Medhurst tixy@linaro.org
and you can include an ACK for the other patches in this series too.
Thanks.
@@ -1593,7 +1594,6 @@ static int run_test_cases(void (*tests)(void), const union decode_item *table) return 0; }
I know the above blank line isn't needed but I believe the convention is to avoid doing unrelated white-space clean-ups in patches.
Right, I will remove it. Should this series go through Russell's patch tracking system or it can be pulled to some tree?