Hello, On Thursday 18 February 2010 15:24:13 ext Jarkko Nikula wrote: > On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:37:14 +0200 > > Ilkka Koskinen <[email protected]> wrote: > > static inline void __devexit omap34xx_device_exit(struct omap_mcbsp > > *mcbsp) { > > > > - if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) > > + if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) { > > > > omap_additional_remove(mcbsp->dev); > > > > + > > + if (mcbsp->id == 2 || mcbsp->id == 3) > > + omap_st_remove(mcbsp); > > + } > > > > } > > Are you sure about these ids? Same comment to the patch 2 as well. > Worth to check.
They are correct. mcbsp->id is 1 based (1 -> McBSP1, 2 -> McBSP2, etc) While the exported functions expect the id to be 0 based (0 -> McBSP1, 1 -> McBSP2, etc) But, yes it is confusing at times... -- Péter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
