From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laurent Pinchart Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 02:41:15 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/29] ARM: shmobile: r7s72100: Don't define SCIF platform data in an array Message-Id: <8818606.yov1uvl232@avalon> List-Id: References: <1384054421-13357-1-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> <1384054421-13357-13-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> <527FD1F8.7040309@cogentembedded.com> In-Reply-To: <527FD1F8.7040309@cogentembedded.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Sergei Shtylyov Cc: Laurent Pinchart , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Bastian Hecht , Paul Mundt Hi Sergei, On Sunday 10 November 2013 22:35:36 Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > On 10-11-2013 7:33, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > The SCIF driver is transitioning to platform resources. Board code will > > thus need to define an array of resources for each SCIF device. This is > > incompatible with the macro-based SCIF platform data definition as an > > array. Rework the macro to define platform data as individual > > structures. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > > > > --- > > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/setup-r7s72100.c | 49 > > +++++++++++++++------------------ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 27 > > deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/setup-r7s72100.c > > b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/setup-r7s72100.c index d4eb509..dbcbb81 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/setup-r7s72100.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/setup-r7s72100.c > > [...] > > > @@ -39,35 +39,30 @@ > > [...] > > > -static inline void r7s72100_register_scif(int idx) > > -{ > > - platform_device_register_data(&platform_bus, "sh-sci", idx, &scif[idx], > > - sizeof(struct plat_sci_port)); > > -} > > +#define r7s72100_register_scif(index) \ > > + platform_device_register_data(&platform_bus, "sh-sci", index, \ > > + &scif##index##_platform_data, \ > > + sizeof(scif##index##_platform_data)) > > Not sure why you changes the indentation here, it was alright before the > patch. No reason, that's a mistake, I'll fix it. Thank you for pointing it out. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart