Re: [PATCH] balance parenthesis in serial core

On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 13:37 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Thanks.  so...  why shouldn't we just remove the buggy&&unused
> RELEVANT_CFLAG defines??

I was just about to suggest that. I originally intended to use them for
the obvious purpose, but then realised that we can just rely on the
integers i_speed and o_speed instead.

Do you want a replacement/incremental patch?

-- 
dwmw2

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] balance parenthesis in serial core
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• References:
  • mm snapshot broken-out-2007-06-27-03-28.tar.gz uploaded
    • From: [email protected]
  • [PATCH] balance parenthesis in serial core
    • From: Mariusz Kozlowski <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] balance parenthesis in serial core
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] balance parenthesis in serial core
• Next by Date: Re: [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] balance parenthesis in serial core
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] balance parenthesis in serial core
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]