On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:57:56PM +0900, YAMANE Toshiaki wrote:
> Improved position to increment variable i,
> And typo fixes.
>
> Signed-off-by: YAMANE Toshiaki <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/staging/serqt_usb2/serqt_usb2.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/serqt_usb2/serqt_usb2.c
> b/drivers/staging/serqt_usb2/serqt_usb2.c
> index 1b3e995..095d6f2 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/serqt_usb2/serqt_usb2.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/serqt_usb2/serqt_usb2.c
> @@ -309,26 +309,26 @@ static void qt_status_change_check(struct tty_struct
> *tty,
> case 0x00:
> if (i > (RxCount - 4)) {
> dev_dbg(&port->dev,
> - "Illegal escape seuences in
> received data\n");
> + "Illegal escape sequence in
> received data\n");
This is a different type of fix from:
> break;
> }
>
> - ProcessLineStatus(qt_port, data[i + 3]);
> -
> i += 3;
> + ProcessLineStatus(qt_port, data[i]);
I think you just changed the logic in this function, didn't you?
> +
> flag = 1;
> break;
>
> case 0x01:
> if (i > (RxCount - 4)) {
> dev_dbg(&port->dev,
> - "Illegal escape seuences in
> received data\n");
> + "Illegal escape sequence in
> received data\n");
> break;
> }
>
> - ProcessModemStatus(qt_port, data[i + 3]);
> -
> i += 3;
> + ProcessModemStatus(qt_port, data[i]);
Same here, what happens to i after this?
Please break into two patches, and verify that you didn't break anything
here.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
