From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:52:32 +0100 (BST) Received: from phoenix.bawue.net ([193.7.176.60]:8413 "EHLO mail.bawue.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20022668AbXGWOwa (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:52:30 +0100 Received: from lagash (intrt.mips-uk.com [194.74.144.130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.bawue.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B35484A3D; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:44:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ths by lagash with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1ICyDA-0006B4-26; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:44:32 +0100 Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:44:32 +0100 From: Thiemo Seufer To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm1480 serial build fix Message-ID: <20070723134431.GB18207@networkno.de> References: <20070722075515.GB23747@networkno.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 15865 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ths@networkno.de Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips 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