On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > Aren't all the bits in "bcm1480_regs.h" meant to be prefixed with > > BCM1480_DUART? > > Appatenly not, guessing from the header's contents. There are two or three exceptions buried indeed. > > 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. Sure. :) But it looks like you merely follow the tradition here... Maciej
