Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > > diff --git a/include/asm-mips/sibyte/bcm1480_regs.h b/include/asm-mips/sibyte/bcm1480_regs.h > > index 2738c13..c34d36b 100644 > > --- a/include/asm-mips/sibyte/bcm1480_regs.h > > +++ b/include/asm-mips/sibyte/bcm1480_regs.h > > @@ -227,10 +227,15 @@ > > (A_BCM1480_DUART(chan) + \ > > BCM1480_DUART_CHANREG_SPACING * 3 + (reg)) > > > > +#define DUART_IMRISR_SPACING 0x20 > > +#define DUART_INCHNG_SPACING 0x10 > > + > > Aren't all the bits in "bcm1480_regs.h" meant to be prefixed with > BCM1480_DUART? Appatenly not, guessing from the header's contents. > If these are to be the same as for the BCM1250, then they > can probably be defined "in sb1250_regs.h" unconditionally. > > These headers are a horrible mess anyway -- a single definition should be > enough to access the two DUARTs the BCM1480 seems to have... Indeed. I just took the path of least resistance to make it work again. Thiemo
