From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 08:38:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 08:38:22 -0400 Received: from nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com ([66.187.233.200]:31578 "EHLO lacrosse.corp.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 08:38:20 -0400 Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 13:38:09 +0100 From: Tim Waugh To: Zwane Mwaikambo Cc: Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add NetMos 9835 to parport_serial Message-ID: <20020506133809.G27042@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20020506095735.Y27042@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="p3t3jlvjhqjzPvuq" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --p3t3jlvjhqjzPvuq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 02:14:25PM +0200, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: > All the patches i've seen thus far were for some other chip (forgot the= =20 > ID), but for that 9835 i needed it desperately so i tested it quite a lot= .=20 >=20 > + /* netmos_9835 (not tested) */ { 1, { { 2, -1 }, } }, >=20 > I'm not sure about the others, but i doubt that one would work. Well, if { 2, 3 } works then { 2, -1 } will surely work, although without ECP support. I didn't realise that NetMos cards had ECP support at the time I wrote the above code. > Where there conflicting success/failure reports for the same > devices? I'm sorry, I don't recall. Tim. */ --p3t3jlvjhqjzPvuq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE81nkxyaXy9qA00+cRAiwpAKCy+P8mLfZYQohquqUWtaDivZeruQCdHr5M HG5a72ejfQbONdoVeDnCa+w= =z7Ip -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --p3t3jlvjhqjzPvuq--