[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <346D35FD8BD841329CFDA7803DDB899E@hacdom.okisemi.com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 17:17:19 +0900
From: "Tomoya MORINAGA" <tomoya-linux@....okisemi.com>
To: "'Greg KH'" <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc: "'Alan Cox'" <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
<qi.wang@...el.com>, <yong.y.wang@...el.com>,
<joel.clark@...el.com>, <kok.howg.ewe@...el.com>,
<toshiharu-linux@....okisemi.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] 8250_pci: add -ENODEV code for Intel EG20T PCH
On Monday, May 30, 2011 4:47 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> Why put this with an #if around it?
> Why not just always not
> bind to this driver as we have a "correct" driver for the
> hardware now?
Let me clarify your saying.
Which does your saying mean, (1) or (2) or else?
(1)
> +#if defined(CONFIG_SERIAL_PCH_UART) || defined(CONFIG_SERIAL_PCH_UART_MODULE)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +#endif
(2)
> + if ((dev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL && dev->device == 0x8811) ||
> + (dev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL && dev->device == 0x8812) ||
> + (dev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL && dev->device == 0x8813) ||
> + (dev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL && dev->device == 0x8814) ||
> + (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x8027) ||
> + (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x8028) ||
> + (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x8029) ||
> + (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x800C) ||
> + (dev->vendor == 0x10DB && dev->device == 0x800D))
> + return -ENODEV;
With Best Regards,
-----------------------------------------
Tomoya MORINAGA
OKI SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists