From: DaMouse <damouse@gmail.com>
To: "blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it" <blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] uml: fix mainline lazyness about TTY layer patch
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:26:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1a56ea39041028132610a1579e@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041028200635.3366D7436@localhost>
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:04:51 +0200, blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it
<blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> wrote:
>
> While changing the TTY layer, an API parameter was removed, so it was removed
> by almost all calls, changing their prototype. But one use of one such
> function was not updated, breaking UML compilation. This is the fix.
>
> Should go in directly - trivial fix.
>
> Thanks for the breakage, too :-).
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it>
> ---
>
> vanilla-linux-2.6.9-paolo/arch/um/drivers/line.c | 2 --
> vanilla-linux-2.6.9-paolo/arch/um/drivers/ssl.c | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN arch/um/drivers/ssl.c~uml-mainline-is-lazy-fix arch/um/drivers/ssl.c
> --- vanilla-linux-2.6.9/arch/um/drivers/ssl.c~uml-mainline-is-lazy-fix 2004-10-27 01:47:58.000000000 +0200
> +++ vanilla-linux-2.6.9-paolo/arch/um/drivers/ssl.c 2004-10-27 01:48:07.000000000 +0200
> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ static int ssl_write(struct tty_struct *
>
> static void ssl_put_char(struct tty_struct *tty, unsigned char ch)
> {
> - line_write(serial_lines, tty, 0, &ch, sizeof(ch));
> + line_write(serial_lines, tty, &ch, sizeof(ch));
> }
>
> static void ssl_flush_chars(struct tty_struct *tty)
> diff -puN arch/um/drivers/line.c~uml-mainline-is-lazy-fix arch/um/drivers/line.c
> --- vanilla-linux-2.6.9/arch/um/drivers/line.c~uml-mainline-is-lazy-fix 2004-10-27 01:49:16.000000000 +0200
> +++ vanilla-linux-2.6.9-paolo/arch/um/drivers/line.c 2004-10-27 01:49:47.000000000 +0200
> @@ -110,7 +110,6 @@ static int flush_buffer(struct line *lin
> int line_write(struct line *lines, struct tty_struct *tty, const char *buf, int len)
> {
> struct line *line;
> - char *new;
> unsigned long flags;
> int n, err, i, ret = 0;
>
> @@ -143,7 +142,6 @@ int line_write(struct line *lines, struc
> }
> out_up:
> up(&line->sem);
> - out_free:
> return(ret);
> }
>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=lazyness
NOW who's lazy :P
-DaMouse
--
I know I broke SOMETHING but its their fault for not fixing it before me
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-28 20:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-28 20:04 [patch 1/1] uml: fix mainline lazyness about TTY layer patch blaisorblade_spam
2004-10-28 20:26 ` DaMouse [this message]
2004-10-28 23:36 ` Blaisorblade
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-28 20:19 blaisorblade_spam
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1a56ea39041028132610a1579e@mail.gmail.com \
--to=damouse@gmail.com \
--cc=blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.