Hello,
On Thursday 18 February 2010 15:24:13 ext Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:37:14 +0200
>
> Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka.koskinen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > static inline void __devexit omap34xx_device_exit(struct omap_mcbsp
> > *mcbsp) {
> >
> > - if (cpu_is_omap34xx())
> > + if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) {
> >
> > omap_additional_remove(mcbsp->dev);
> >
> > +
> > + if (mcbsp->id == 2 || mcbsp->id == 3)
> > + omap_st_remove(mcbsp);
> > + }
> >
> > }
>
> Are you sure about these ids? Same comment to the patch 2 as well.
> Worth to check.
They are correct.
mcbsp->id is 1 based (1 -> McBSP1, 2 -> McBSP2, etc)
While the exported functions expect the id to
be 0 based (0 -> McBSP1, 1 -> McBSP2, etc)
But, yes it is confusing at times...
--
Péter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
