[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200115163327.GF32742@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 18:33:27 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] tty: baudrate: Synchronise baud_table[] and
baud_bits[]
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 06:27:56PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 07:09:17PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Synchronize baud rate tables for better readability.
>
> "Synchronize"? With what?
Between each other. This SPARC thingy makes it's harder to follow.
> Why? I'm all for cleaning up code, but this
> just seems totally gratuitous.
Btw, while doing it I found that SPARC actually supports more baud rates than
defined in those arrays. Without this patch I would not (easily) notice that.
Should I also attach another patch and resend?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists