From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:50:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from h155.mvista.com ([63.81.120.155]:61625 "EHLO imap.sh.mvista.com") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S23302467AbYKFWuv (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2008 22:50:51 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [10.150.0.9]) by imap.sh.mvista.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132433ECD; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 14:50:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <491374C4.7040400@ru.mvista.com> Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:50:44 +0300 From: Sergei Shtylyov User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Martin Gebert Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: AU1000: SSI0 naming inconsistency References: <4912CFA7.9000508@alpha-bit.de> In-Reply-To: <4912CFA7.9000508@alpha-bit.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 21224 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: sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Hello. Martin Gebert wrote: > Working on a 2.6.22 kernel for a AU1100 board, I came across the > following inconsistency in register naming in > include/asm/mach-au1x00/au1000.h, which still exists in 2.6.27.4 (lines > 1334-1389). There's no register SSI0_CONTROL, it should be named > SSI0_ENABLE, as it is for SSI1: > > --8><-- > #define SSI0_CONTROL 0xB1600100 > #define SSI_CONTROL_CD (1<<1) > #define SSI_CONTROL_E (1<<0) > > /* SSI1 */ > [...] > #define SSI1_ENABLE 0xB1680100 > > [...] > #define SSI_ENABLE_CD (1<<1) > #define SSI_ENABLE_E (1<<0) > --><8-- > > As I'm not working on a current kernel repo I don't dare to provide a > patch. Would fixing this be desirable? > This seems to be a only top of iceberg as the SSI register bits are all defined twice in the arch/mips/include/asm/mach-au1x00/au1000.h. I wonder why gcc ignores macro redefinitions... Patch is welcome but be sure not to break the users of those macros (if there are any :-)... > Martin WBR, Sergei