Re: Some SA11x0 diffs
Robert Swindells <[email protected]> Thu, 21 May 2009 15:44:03 +0100 (BST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.ports.hpcarm,gmane.os.netbsd.ports.arm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Quentin Garnier wrote: >On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 06:54:25PM +0100, Robert Swindells wrote: >=20 >> I have put some diffs in ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/misc/rjs/arm.diff.gz >Side effects of sa11x0_softc: one miss in sed_saip.c Got it. >Side effects of obio_softc (from lubbock_var.h): one miss in >lubbock_pcic.c (a call to device_parent), and if_sm_obio.c needs some >changes too. I think I have fixed these now. >Side effects of ipaq_softc: uda1341.c needs some changes. The uda1341 driver isn't included in the IPAQ kernel at present, I had done the device_t split for it as well but the version in CVS doesn't even compile. I'm guessing that we have tightened up warnings since it was written. The device_t split does belong with the rest of these diffs though so I will include it. >Also, I've noted that the device_t split in lubbock_lcd.c is broken (it >was done in January); the cookie passed to the wsdisplay_accessops is >the softc, and not a device_t, so all the (struct device *) casts are >wrong. I will look at this. >Finally, I noticed a couple unrelated changes in the diff: a mod to the >LUBBOCK kernel config, and a change in ipaq_saip.c turning SAEGPIO_BASE >into sa->sa_addr. I can't judge on those, but you don't want to commit >them at the same time anyway. The LUBBOCK config change isn't needed. I will do the SAEGPIO_BASE change later. I will redo the diffs later and generate some more test kernels. Thanks, Robert Swindells