On 2010-03-23 at 22:54:59 +0100, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:52:23 +0100 > Tobias Klauser <tklauser@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > + sigs |= (altera_uart_getppdcd(port->line) ? TIOCM_CD : 0); > > + sigs |= (altera_uart_getppdtr(port->line) ? TIOCM_DTR : 0); > > We seem to be missing a few things here. > > drivers/serial/altera_uart.c: In function 'altera_uart_get_mctrl': > drivers/serial/altera_uart.c:100: error: implicit declaration of function 'altera_uart_getppdcd' > drivers/serial/altera_uart.c:101: error: implicit declaration of function 'altera_uart_getppdtr' > drivers/serial/altera_uart.c: In function 'altera_uart_set_mctrl': > drivers/serial/altera_uart.c:114: error: implicit declaration of function 'altera_uart_setppdtr' These should usually be declared in a board specific header. There were compatibility macros in altera_uart.c which defined them to NOPs in case the board header did not properly define them. But I remove them as per request by Alan Cox (Message-ID: 20100301181920.3952c3e7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx). Should we add them again (maybe to altera_uart.h)? Or would it be better to define a config symbol which is set in the board specific Kconfig and altera_uart depends on it? Thanks Tobias -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
