From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757278Ab0CLJW3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 04:22:29 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:47527 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756999Ab0CLJWY convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 04:22:24 -0500 X-Authenticated: #20450766 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+/0zFI0De/h0BzwCIGZXEAcrqUJ1k3hynjWhaHM/ Lt8InVtpKbxE7y Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:22:31 +0100 (CET) From: Guennadi Liakhovetski To: =?UTF-8?q?Uwe=20Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= cc: Linux Media Mailing List , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Antonio Ospite , Sascha Hauer , Hans Verkuil , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] V4L/DVB: mx1-camera: compile fix In-Reply-To: <1267785924-16167-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: References: <20100304194241.GG19843@pengutronix.de> <1267785924-16167-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.45000000000000001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Uwe 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 > --- > 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 > #include > > +#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 The line #define DMA_BASE IO_ADDRESS(DMA_BASE_ADDR) in it is no longer valid, right?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. 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? Or maybe even we shall remap those registers? Thanks Guennadi > /* > * CSI registers > */ > -#define DMA_CCR(x) (0x8c + ((x) << 6)) /* Control Registers */ > -#define DMA_DIMR 0x08 /* Interrupt mask Register */ > +#define DMA_CCR(x) __DMAREG(0x8c + ((x) << 6)) /* Control Registers */ > +#define DMA_DIMR __DMAREG(0x08) /* Interrupt mask Register */ > #define CSICR1 0x00 /* CSI Control Register 1 */ > #define CSISR 0x08 /* CSI Status Register */ > #define CSIRXR 0x10 /* CSI RxFIFO Register */ > @@ -783,7 +785,7 @@ static int __init mx1_camera_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > pcdev); > > imx_dma_config_channel(pcdev->dma_chan, IMX_DMA_TYPE_FIFO, > - IMX_DMA_MEMSIZE_32, DMA_REQ_CSI_R, 0); > + IMX_DMA_MEMSIZE_32, MX1_DMA_REQ_CSI_R, 0); > /* burst length : 16 words = 64 bytes */ > imx_dma_config_burstlen(pcdev->dma_chan, 0); > > @@ -797,8 +799,8 @@ static int __init mx1_camera_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > set_fiq_handler(&mx1_camera_sof_fiq_start, &mx1_camera_sof_fiq_end - > &mx1_camera_sof_fiq_start); > > - regs.ARM_r8 = DMA_BASE + DMA_DIMR; > - regs.ARM_r9 = DMA_BASE + DMA_CCR(pcdev->dma_chan); > + regs.ARM_r8 = (long)DMA_DIMR; > + regs.ARM_r9 = (long)DMA_CCR(pcdev->dma_chan); > regs.ARM_r10 = (long)pcdev->base + CSICR1; > regs.ARM_fp = (long)pcdev->base + CSISR; > regs.ARM_sp = 1 << pcdev->dma_chan; > -- > 1.7.0 > --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/