[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181001123916.GC7269@zn.tnic>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 14:39:16 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Stuart R . Anderson" <stuart.r.anderson@...el.com>,
alan@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/earlyprintk: Add a force option for pciserial
device
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 09:16:19PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> Got your point. As the following [,baudrate] is also optional, and this
> "force" could be the last option for pciserial. The check may be
>
> if (!strncmp(s, "force,", 6) || !strncmp(s, "force ", 6)) {
> force = 1;
> s += 6;
> }
You have !strncmp(s, "force,", 6) twice in there. I have no clue what
you're trying to say.
> Do you mean this?
>
> if (((classcode >> 16 != PCI_CLASS_COMMUNICATION_MODEM) &&
> (classcode >> 16 != PCI_CLASS_COMMUNICATION_SERIAL)) ||
> (((classcode >> 8) & 0xff) != 0x02)) /* 16550 I/F at BAR0 */ {
> if (!force)
> return;
> }
Yes.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists