Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 03 Feb 2017 21:31:14 +0000 | From | Sudip Mukherjee <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v13 1/2] serial: exar: split out the exar code from 8250_pci |
| |
On Friday 03 February 2017 02:02 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2017-01-30 23:28, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: >> From: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk> >> >> Add the serial driver for the Exar chips. And also register the >> platform device for the GPIO provided by the Exar chips. > > "Also" means you are doing two things in one patch - was this already > discussed and accepted in previous review rounds? If so, ignore my > comment, but I would have asked for two patches, one that just > translates the existing code and another that adds this new feature. >
Like Andy replied, this is already in tty-next.
>> >> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk> >> --- >> >> Andy, >> I have added the if (!board) check, but I am not sure how board can be >> NULL here. If probe executes that will mean there was a match of the >> device id and so in that case board can not be NULL. >> >> drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_exar.c | 396 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> drivers/tty/serial/8250/Kconfig | 4 + >> drivers/tty/serial/8250/Makefile | 1 + >> 3 files changed, 401 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_exar.c >> >> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_exar.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_exar.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..ba1f359 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_exar.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,396 @@ >> +/* >> + * Probe module for 8250/16550-type Exar chips PCI serial ports. >> + * >> + * Based on drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pci.c, >> + * >> + * Copyright (C) 2017 Sudip Mukherjee, All Rights Reserved. > > It's legally cleaner to carry over the copyright notice from the > original file, unless you rewrote everything (unlikely on first glance). > You may still add yours to the list for the significant contributions.
Should i send a separate patch to modify those? Andy?
> > BTW, are you personally the copyright holder or your employer Codethink? > Depends on your contractual situation, but the former is less common.
Well, Codethink has nothing to do with this patch. This was a voluntary work started before I joined Codethink, but then I joined Codethink and found very little time to finish this. So finally now its done.
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/2015-November/015372.html
Regards Sudip
| |