* Anna, Suman <s-anna@xxxxxx> [100222 13:41]: > Tony, > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tony Lindgren [mailto:tony@xxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 3:37 PM > > To: Anna, Suman > > Cc: Shilimkar, Santosh; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > Hiroshi.DOYU@xxxxxxxxx; Clark, Rob; Kanigeri, Hari; C.A, Subramaniam > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] omap2/3/4: mailbox: remove compiler warning > > > > * Anna, Suman <s-anna@xxxxxx> [100222 11:53]: > > > Hi Santosh, > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Shilimkar, Santosh > > > > Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 12:47 PM > > > > To: Anna, Suman; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Cc: Hiroshi.DOYU@xxxxxxxxx; Clark, Rob; Kanigeri, Hari; C.A, > > Subramaniam > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/5] omap2/3/4: mailbox: remove compiler warning > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-omap- > > > > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anna, > > > > > Suman > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 2:37 AM > > > > > To: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > Cc: Hiroshi.DOYU@xxxxxxxxx; Clark, Rob; Kanigeri, Hari; C.A, > > Subramaniam > > > > > Subject: [PATCH 1/5] omap2/3/4: mailbox: remove compiler warning > > > > > > > > > > From 78d00b562548e1d95ad12a4d8121be67950daf68 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 > > 2001 > > > > > From: Suman Anna <s-anna@xxxxxx> > > > > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:27:21 -0600 > > > > > Subject: [PATCH 1/5] omap2/3/4: mailbox: remove compiler warning > > > > > > > > > > Remove a compiler warning in device-specific > > > > > mailbox module. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@xxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/mailbox.c | 2 ++ > > > > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/mailbox.c b/arch/arm/mach- > > > > omap2/mailbox.c > > > > > index 2c9fd1c..c970cf6 100644 > > > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/mailbox.c > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/mailbox.c > > > > > @@ -419,8 +419,10 @@ static int __devinit omap2_mbox_probe(struct > > > > platform_device *pdev) > > > > > #endif > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2420) /* IVA */ > > > > > err_iva1: > > > > > omap_mbox_unregister(&mbox_dsp_info); > > > > > +#endif > > > > Can't we avoid the #ifdef here? Is this "omap_mbox_unregister" omap2 > > > > specific? > > > > > > Yes, this #ifdef is specific to 2420. There are other places in the > > mailbox code which also utilize a similar #ifdef. I have merely added it > > to remove the compile warning. I think it needs a separate patch to remove > > all the 2420 specific #ifdefs. > > > > > > Let's drop this patch for now. We should fix this with something like > > this in mailbox.h: > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2420 > > int omap_mbox_unregister(struct omap_mbox *); > > #else > > static inline int omap_mbox_unregister(struct omap_mbox *mbox) > > { > > return 0; > > } > > #endif > > > > That way we can get rid of the ifdefs in other places too. > > > > Tony > > Sorry, my statement is a little bit misleading. The omap_mbox_unregister function itself is not specific to 2420, but rather the call is. It should be called only for 2420, and hence the #ifdef. OK, maybe you can update to just test for if (cpu_is_omap2420()) there? Tony -- 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
