It's no misfunction. Just the wrong name. Koji Matsumuro
Andi Kleen <a...@firstfloor.org> wrote on 2011/07/29 09:37:03: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 09:27:56AM +0900, matsu...@nts.ricoh.co.jp wrote: > > Dear Sir, > > > > Ricoh 1180:e823 device is named R5U220/R5U232 (2 devices have the same > > device ID ). > > So, I think it should be declared to as PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_R5U220. > Is that just the wrong name or will it actually cause misfunction? > I will keep it if it's just the wrong name, but the name should be probably > fixed upstream. > -Andi _______________________________________________ stable mailing list stable@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable