Re: [PATCH RFC net-next v1 1/9] ptp: introduce programmable pins.

[Richard Cochran]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 08:58:45AM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote:
> >+	if (pin1 && pin1->func == PTP_PF_PHYSYNC) {
> >+		pr_err("sorry, cannot reprogram the calibration pin\n");
> >+		return -EINVAL;
> 
>            ^^^^
> Will this ever happen? pin1 && pin1->func == PTP_PF_PHYSYNC means
> that func == PTP_PF_PHYSYNC, but in this case you already return
> -EINVAL a few lines above.

This a bug. I really meant to test (pin2->func == PTP_PF_PHYSYNC) to
prevent clobbering the calibration function with some other function.
I'll fix it for v2.

Thanks,
Richard

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