Re: [PATCH 1/7] usb: gadget: pxa25x_udc: move register definitions from arch

[Felipe Balbi]

Hi,

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> ixp4xx and pxa25x both use this driver and provide a slightly
> different set of register definitions for it. Aside from that,
> the definition in the ixp4xx-regs.h header conflicts with the
> on in the pxa27x device driver when compile-testing that:
>
> In file included from ../drivers/usb/gadget/udc/pxa27x_udc.c:37:0:
> ../drivers/usb/gadget/udc/pxa27x_udc.h:26:0: warning: "UDCCR" redefined
>  #define UDCCR  0x0000  /* UDC Control Register */
>  ^
> In file included from ../arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/include/mach/hardware.h:27:0,
>                  from ../arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/include/mach/io.h:18,
>                  from ../arch/arm/include/asm/io.h:194,
>                  from ../include/linux/io.h:25,
>                  from ../include/linux/irq.h:24,
>                  from ../drivers/usb/gadget/udc/pxa27x_udc.c:23:
> ../arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/include/mach/ixp4xx-regs.h:415:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition
>  #define UDCCR  IXP4XX_USB_REG(IXP4XX_USB_BASE_VIRT+0x0000)
>
> This addresses both issues by moving all the definitions into the
> pxa25x_udc driver itself. It turns out the only difference between
> them was 'UDCCS_IO_ROF', and that could well be a mistake when it
> was incorrectly copied from pxa25x to ixp4xx.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>

FYI, this series now sits in my testing/next. If you could just check
that I didn't mess anything up, I'd be glad.

Thanks

-- 
balbi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature