From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nico@fluxnic.net (Nicolas Pitre) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 14:46:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [PATCH] msm: fix debug-macro.S build failure In-Reply-To: <20101028182922.GJ3122@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1288216688-718-1-git-send-email-dwalker@codeaurora.org> <20101027221428.GB28391@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1288283413.2683.2.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <20101028163518.GG3122@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1288284066.2683.9.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <20101028174653.GH3122@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1288288824.2683.24.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <1288290458.2683.25.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <20101028182922.GJ3122@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:27:38AM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 14:24 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > > > > This is what the function currently has, > > > > > > > > .macro addruart, rp, rv > > > > ldr \rp, =MSM_DEBUG_UART_PHYS > > > > ldr \rv, =MSM_DEBUG_UART_BASE > > > > .endm > > > > > > > > So if we have a MSM_DEBUG_UART_PHYS and MSM_DEBUG_UART_BASE we're > > > > returning it. We don't actually have those values for all the boards > > > > tho. My understanding was that there are some generic arm changes > > > > needed, but I need to confirm that. > > > > > > Just return 0 in both registers when you have nothing better to return. > > > > What about the other functions ? > > If you don't populate the other macros, you're only loading an address > into a register which won't be used. DOH, indeed. Nevermind my previous comment. Still, skipping the mapping when given address is 0 could make sense too, instead of a magic 0xfff00000. Nicolas