Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 01:56:29AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 01:36:53AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > +uart_handle_sysrq_char-warning-fix.patch
> > > >
> > > > Fix a warning
> > >
> > > Andrew, this requires a little more fixing than your simple patch.
> > > Several drivers omit 'regs' from the receive handler when sysrq is
> > > not enabled. Hence, this simple fix on its own will cause compile
> > > failures.
> >
> > Me no understand. It replaces a three-arg macro with a three-arg static
> > inline?
>
> Some serial drivers drop 'regs' from the parent function when sysrq is
> disabled. 'regs' is only passed for sysrq support.
>
Me still no understand.
+static inline int uart_handle_sysrq_char(struct uart_port *port,
+ unsigned int ch, struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
That function doesn't touch *regs, and all callers pass in either
a pt_regs* or NULL??
-
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/
