From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751209AbaFDIpe (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2014 04:45:34 -0400 Received: from nasmtp01.atmel.com ([192.199.1.246]:49678 "EHLO DVREDG02.corp.atmel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750742AbaFDIpa (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2014 04:45:30 -0400 Message-ID: <538EDC98.2080700@atmel.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:45:12 +0800 From: Josh Wu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Bolle , Andrew Victor , Nicolas Ferre , Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , Russell King CC: , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: at91: #if 0 out ISI code for AT91SAM9263 References: <1400142868.20469.12.camel@x220> <1400845814.31526.29.camel@x220> In-Reply-To: <1400845814.31526.29.camel@x220> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.168.5.13] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Paul On 5/23/2014 7:50 PM, Paul Bolle wrote: > In v2.6.25 code was added for an Image Sensor Interface (ISI) for > AT91SAM9263. That code depended on the Kconfig macro > CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI and its MODULE variant. The related Kconfig symbol > has never been added to the tree. The net effect of this was that > at91_add_device_isi() was a NOP. No one noticed because no callers of > that function were added to the tree at that time. > > The first caller of a function with that name was added in v3.4. But > that caller apparently only called the function defined for AT91SAM9G45. > (that function was also added in v3.4). So even then AT91SAM9263's NOP > version of at91_add_device_isi() remained unused. > > This means that the ISI code for AT91SAM9263 could be removed. But, > since it can be useful for future reference, let's "#if 0" it instead. > > Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle > --- > v2: Jean-Christophe would like to keep the information currently hidden > behind "#if defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI) [...]". I'd like the > reference to that Kconfig macro dropped. Using "#if 0" will do both, so > that makes for a nice compromise, I'd say. I think we can keep the #if 0 as a reference so far. When the devices file is finally removed. We will add the ISI resouces to DT file. So I am ok with this. Hi, J.C. What do you think of this patch? Best Regards, Josh Wu > > Josh verified that this definition of at91_add_device_isi() never will > be called. Thanks! > > Still untested! > > arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 6 +----- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c > index 43d53d6156dd..30af3048ade5 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c > @@ -900,8 +900,7 @@ void __init at91_add_device_lcdc(struct atmel_lcdfb_pdata *data) {} > * Image Sensor Interface > * -------------------------------------------------------------------- */ > > -#if defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI) || defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI_MODULE) > - > +#if 0 /* keep for future reference */ > struct resource isi_resources[] = { > [0] = { > .start = AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI, > @@ -947,9 +946,6 @@ void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data, > /* TODO: register the PCK for ISI_MCK and set its parent */ > } > } > -#else > -void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data, > - bool use_pck_as_mck) {} > #endif > >