[PATCH v2 14/15] ARM: mxs: Add initial mx28evk support

[shawn.gsc@gmail.com (Shawn Guo)]

2010/12/9 Uwe Kleine-K?nig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>:
> Hello Shawn
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 05:03:54PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>> 2010/12/9 Uwe Kleine-K?nig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>:
>> > Hello Shwan,
> ups, sorry for mistyping your name.
>
>> > On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 03:04:37PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>> >> 2010/12/9 Uwe Kleine-K?nig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>:
>> >> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 12:32:02AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>> >> >> +static iomux_cfg_t mx28evk_pads[] = {
>> >> > This can be const and __initconst, ditto for mx23evk
>> >> >
>> >> With u64 iomux_cfg_t changes, I'm afraid the suggestion becomes invalid.
>> > Really? Why?
>> >
>> I'm confused by the compiling error below when adding __initconst for
>> mx28evk_pads[], and mistakenly blaming u64 iomux_cfg_t changes.
>>
>> arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c: In function ?mx28evk_init?:
>> arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c:34: error: mx28_fec_pdata causes a
>> section type conflict
>> make[1]: *** [arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.o] Error 1
>> make: *** [arch/arm/mach-mxs] Error 2
>>
>> Actually it can be fixed by the following change.
>>
>> -static const struct fec_platform_data mx28_fec_pdata __initconst = {
>> +static struct fec_platform_data mx28_fec_pdata __initconst = {
>> ? ? ? ? ?.phy = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RMII,
>> ?};
> this change is wrong. ?You need to assert that all data being marked
> with __initconst is const, too.
>
After adding const for mx28evk_pads[], I got the following error.

  CC      arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.o
arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c: In function ?mx28evk_init?:
arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c:102: warning: passing argument 1 of
?mxs_iomux_setup_multiple_pads? discards qualifiers from pointer
target type
arch/arm/mach-mxs/include/mach/iomux.h:115: note: expected
?iomux_cfg_t *? but argument is of type ?const iomux_cfg_t *?

This takes me back to my first judgment.  Is it proper to add
__initconst for mx28evk_pads[]? We are changing iomux_cfg_t to u64 for
making pad definition modifiable.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn