linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] bcm1480 serial build fix

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm1480 serial build fix
From: Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:44:32 +0100
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.64N.0707231353030.13557@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20070722075515.GB23747@networkno.de> <Pine.LNX.4.64N.0707231353030.13557@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11)
Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> 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?

Appatenly not, guessing from the header's contents.

> 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...

Indeed. I just took the path of least resistance to make it work again.


Thiemo

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