On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 04:54:09PM -0800, David Miller wrote: > > On 01/11/2011 02:21 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > >> This patch cleans up the usage of two macros which specify the mailbox > >> usage. AT91_MB_RX_FIRST and AT91_MB_RX_NUM define the first and the > >> number of RX mailboxes. The current driver uses these variables in an > >> unclean way; assuming that AT91_MB_RX_FIRST is 0; > >> > >> This patch cleans up the usage of these macros, no longer assuming > >> AT91_MB_RX_FIRST == 0. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <[email protected]> > > > > Any comments on this? > > I would also seriously like to see these changes get some feedback, > they've been rotting in patchwork for more than a week.
I have no experience with this specific chip. IMO, this chip errata (as explained in the post) got an elegant solution. That part definitely gets my Acked-by: Kurt Van Dijck <[email protected]> Regards, Kurt _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
