Re: [PATCH v2] V4L/DVB: mx1-camera: compile fix

["Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>]

Hello,

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:22:31AM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > This is a regression of
> > 
> > 	7d58289 (mx1: prefix SOC specific defines with MX1_ and deprecate old names)
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  drivers/media/video/mx1_camera.c |   12 +++++++-----
> >  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/video/mx1_camera.c b/drivers/media/video/mx1_camera.c
> > index 2ba14fb..29c2833 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/video/mx1_camera.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/video/mx1_camera.c
> > @@ -45,11 +45,13 @@
> >  #include <mach/hardware.h>
> >  #include <mach/mx1_camera.h>
> >  
> > +#define __DMAREG(offset)	(MX1_IO_ADDRESS(MX1_DMA_BASE_ADDR) + offset)
> > +
> 
> Well, I think, Sascha is right, we have to fix 
> arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/dma-mx1-mx2.h, because that's what actually 
> got broken. The line
> 
> #define DMA_BASE IO_ADDRESS(DMA_BASE_ADDR)
> 
> in it is no longer valid, right? So, we have to either remove it, or fix 
> it, if we think, that other drivers might start using it.
I thought a minimal fix would be a good idea.  I have no problem with a
clean one though.

>                                                           And even if we 
> decide to remove it from the header and implement here, wouldn't it be 
> better to choose a name, not beginning with "__"? Something like 
> MX1_DMA_REG, perhaps?
Then the register definitions should go into the header, too.  I will
prepare a patch later today.
>                       Or maybe even we shall remap those registers?
Well, they are remapped, don't they?  Otherwise IO_ADDRESS wouldn't
work.

Best regards
Uwe
-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |