On 2 March 2016 at 04:38, Adam Ford wrote:
> A few boards still use ns16550_platdata structures, but assume the structure
> is going to be in a specific order. By explicitly naming each entry,
> this should also help 'future-proof' in the event the structure changes.
>
> Tested on the Logic PD Tor
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 05:38:18AM -0600, Adam Ford wrote:
> A few boards still use ns16550_platdata structures, but assume the structure
> is going to be in a specific order. By explicitly naming each entry,
> this should also help 'future-proof' in the event the structure changes.
>
> Tested on
Hi Adam,
On 02.03.2016 13:38, Adam Ford wrote:
> A few boards still use ns16550_platdata structures, but assume the structure
> is going to be in a specific order. By explicitly naming each entry,
> this should also help 'future-proof' in the event the structure changes.
>
> Tested on the Logic P
> Am 02.03.2016 um 12:38 schrieb Adam Ford :
>
> A few boards still use ns16550_platdata structures, but assume the structure
> is going to be in a specific order. By explicitly naming each entry,
> this should also help 'future-proof' in the event the structure changes.
>
> Tested on the Logic
A few boards still use ns16550_platdata structures, but assume the structure
is going to be in a specific order. By explicitly naming each entry,
this should also help 'future-proof' in the event the structure changes.
Tested on the Logic PD Torpedo + Wireless.
I only changed a handful of devices
5 matches
Mail list logo