linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] bcm1480 serial build fix

To: Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm1480 serial build fix
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:00:16 +0100 (BST)
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20070722075515.GB23747@networkno.de>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20070722075515.GB23747@networkno.de>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Thiemo Seufer wrote:

> diff --git a/include/asm-mips/sibyte/bcm1480_regs.h 
> b/include/asm-mips/sibyte/bcm1480_regs.h
> index 2738c13..c34d36b 100644
> --- a/include/asm-mips/sibyte/bcm1480_regs.h
> +++ b/include/asm-mips/sibyte/bcm1480_regs.h
> @@ -227,10 +227,15 @@
>       (A_BCM1480_DUART(chan) +                                        \
>        BCM1480_DUART_CHANREG_SPACING * 3 + (reg))
>  
> +#define DUART_IMRISR_SPACING     0x20
> +#define DUART_INCHNG_SPACING     0x10
> +

 Aren't all the bits in "bcm1480_regs.h" meant to be prefixed with 
BCM1480_DUART?  If these are to be the same as for the BCM1250, then they 
can probably be defined "in sb1250_regs.h" unconditionally.

 These headers are a horrible mess anyway -- a single definition should be 
enough to access the two DUARTs the BCM1480 seems to have...

  Maciej

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>