On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:26:29 -0600 Marc St-Jean <stjeanma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > + status = *(volatile u32 *)up->port.private_data; It distresses me that this patch uses a variable which this patch doesn't initialise anywhere. It isn't complete. The sub-driver code whch sets up this field shuld be included in the patch, no?
