On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 01:10:39PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 01:38:52PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Monday 29 August 2005 10:09 am, Tom Rini wrote: > > > linux-2.6.13-trini/drivers/serial/kgdb_8250.c | 594 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > The existing stuff in drivers/serial is named "8250_*"; is > > there a reason you're using "kgdb_8250" rather than "8250_kgdb"? > > All the other kgdb stuff tends to be prefixed, not suffixed. But I > don't really care either way.
I'd prefer it was 8250_kgdb.c actually - that keeps it along side the other 8250 files. > > > + switch (CURRENTPORT.iotype) { > > > + case UPIO_MEM: > > > + if (CURRENTPORT.mapbase) > > > + kgdb8250_needs_request_mem_region = 1; > > > + if (CURRENTPORT.flags & UPF_IOREMAP) { > > > + CURRENTPORT.membase = ioport_map(CURRENTPORT.mapbase, > > > + 8 << KGDB8250_REG_SHIFT); > > > > Shouldn't this be ioremap instead of ioport_map? > > If I remember right from the testing, no. Or if my memory is wrong and > that's retorihcal, sure. ioport_map() is supposed to be used to map the IO range for the ioread/ iowrite operations. IOW, it takes something compatible with inb() and friends and converts it to something compatible with ioread8() and friends. It does not take a MMIO cookie, so the code above appears to be conceptually wrong. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/