Re: [PATCHv3 2/2] serial: Add driver for the Altera UART

[Andrew Morton]

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-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/