On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 07:47:47 +0100 Tobias Klauser <tklauser@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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? I guess the latter. There should have been a real implementation of these in the patchset - otherwise the code can't be used or tested. Confused. -- 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
