[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151022163315.GI5257@xsjsorenbubuntu>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 09:33:15 -0700
From: Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>
To: Kedareswara rao Appana <appana.durga.rao@...inx.com>
CC: <anirudh@...inx.com>, <wg@...ndegger.com>, <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
<michal.simek@...inx.com>, <appanad@...inx.com>,
<linux-can@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] can: xilinx: fix bug in bus error handling
On Thu, 2015-10-22 at 10:16AM +0530, Kedareswara rao Appana wrote:
> Simply resetting the peripheral on bus off condition is not enough,
> Because we also need to re-initialize the whole device.
> This patch fixes this issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kedareswara rao Appana <appanad@...inx.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/can/xilinx_can.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/xilinx_can.c b/drivers/net/can/xilinx_can.c
> index 055d6f3..9aeb85f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/xilinx_can.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/xilinx_can.c
> @@ -529,6 +529,8 @@ static int xcan_rx(struct net_device *ndev)
> return 1;
> }
>
> +static void xcan_chip_stop(struct net_device *ndev);
Isn't it possible to move the function and avoid the forward
declaration?
Sören
--
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