[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2025020422-reflected-huff-3334@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 14:42:36 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Andre Werner <andre.werner@...tec-electronic.com>
Cc: jirislaby@...nel.org, hvilleneuve@...onoff.com, andy@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
lech.perczak@...lingroup.com, Maarten.Brock@...ls.nl
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] serial: sc16is7xx: Fix IRQ number check behavior
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 08:18:19AM +0100, Andre Werner wrote:
> The logical meaning of the previous version is wrong due to a typo.
>
> If the IRQ equals 0, no interrupt pin is available and polling mode
> shall be used.
>
> Additionally, this fix adds a check for IRQ < 0 to increase robustness,
> because documentation still says that negative IRQ values cannot be
> absolutely ruled-out.
>
> Fixes: 104c1b9dde9d859dd01bd2d ("serial: sc16is7xx: Add polling mode if no IRQ pin is available")
Nit, this should be:
Fixes: 104c1b9dde9d ("serial: sc16is7xx: Add polling mode if no IRQ pin is available")
I'll go fix up the fixes line...
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists