On 15. 10. 23, 19:10, Cameron Williams wrote:
Fix the PCI comment for the IS-200 card. The PCI ID for the IS-200 is 0x0d80, and the definition used (PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTASHIELD_IS200) is indeed 0x0d80, clarify that by fixing the comment as its neighbouring cards are all at 0x0020 offsets.
The real question is why to maintain a comment here at all? I suggest dropping them both instead.
Signed-off-by: Cameron Williams <cang1@xxxxxxxxxx> --- v2 - v3: Clarify commit message with better explanation of the change. Re-submit patch series using git send-email to make threading work. v1 - v2: This is a resubmission series for the patch series below. That series was lots of changes sent to lots of maintainers, this series is just for the tty/serial/8250 subsystem. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DU0PR02MB789950E64D808DB57E9D7312C4F8A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DU0PR02MB7899DE53DFC900EFB50E53F2C4F8A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DU0PR02MB7899033E7E81EAF3694BC20AC4F8A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DU0PR02MB7899EABA8C3DCAC94DCC79D4C4F8A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c index 62a9bd30b4db..ecb4e9acc70d 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c @@ -4917,7 +4917,7 @@ static const struct pci_device_id serial_pci_tbl[] = { * IntaShield IS-200 */ { PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTASHIELD, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTASHIELD_IS200, - PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, /* 135a.0811 */ + PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, /* 135a.0d80 */ pbn_b2_2_115200 }, /* * IntaShield IS-400
thanks, -- js suse labs
