Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: remove ISI code for AT91SAM9263
On May 15, 2014, at 4:34 PM, Paul Bolle wrote:
>
> In v2.6.25 code was added for an Image Sensor Interface (ISI) for
> AT91SAM9263. That code depended on the Kconfig macro
> CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI and its MODULE variant. The related Kconfig symbol
> has never been added to the tree. The net effect of this was that
> at91_add_device_isi() was a NOP. No one noticed because no callers of
> that function were added to the tree at that time.
>
> The first caller of a function with that name was added in v3.4. But
> that caller apparently only called the function defined for AT91SAM9G45.
> (that function was also added in v3.4). So even then AT91SAM9263's NOP
> version of at91_add_device_isi() remained unused. This means that the
> ISI code for AT91SAM9263 can be removed.
>
Nack
this is just resources and allow until this is converted to DTS to have the
pinctrl and register information
Best Regards,
J.
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
> ---
> Untested!
>
> Could someone please verify that this definition of
> at91_add_device_isi() really never will be called.
>
> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 57
> 1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
> b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
> index 43d53d6156dd..f2dab0a872a1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
> @@ -897,63 +897,6 @@ void __init at91_add_device_lcdc(struct
> atmel_lcdfb_pdata *data) {}
>
>
> /*
> - * Image Sensor Interface
> - * */
> -
> -#if defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI) || defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI_MODULE)
> -
> -struct resource isi_resources[] = {
> - [0] = {
> - .start = AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI,
> - .end= AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI + SZ_16K - 1,
> - .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
> - },
> - [1] = {
> - .start = NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
> - .end= NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
> - .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ,
> - },
> -};
> -
> -static struct platform_device at91sam9263_isi_device = {
> - .name = "at91_isi",
> - .id = -1,
> - .resource = isi_resources,
> - .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(isi_resources),
> -};
> -
> -void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
> - bool use_pck_as_mck)
> -{
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE0, 0); /* ISI_D0 */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE1, 0); /* ISI_D1 */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE2, 0); /* ISI_D2 */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE3, 0); /* ISI_D3 */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE4, 0); /* ISI_D4 */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE5, 0); /* ISI_D5 */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE6, 0); /* ISI_D6 */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE7, 0); /* ISI_D7 */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE8, 0); /* ISI_PCK */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE9, 0); /* ISI_HSYNC */
> - at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE10, 0);/* ISI_VSYNC */
> - at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE12, 0);/* ISI_PD8 */
> - at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE13, 0);/* ISI_PD9 */
> - at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE14, 0);/* ISI_PD10 */
> - at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE15, 0);/* ISI_PD11 */
> -
> - if (use_pck_as_mck) {
> - at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE11, 0);/* ISI_MCK (PCK3) */
> -
> - /* TODO: register the PCK for ISI_MCK and set its parent */
> - }
> -}
> -#else
> -void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
> - bool use_pck_as_mck) {}
> -#endif
> -
> -
> -/*
> * Timer/Counter block
> * */
>
> --
> 1.9.0
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: remove ISI code for AT91SAM9263
On May 15, 2014, at 4:34 PM, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
In v2.6.25 code was added for an Image Sensor Interface (ISI) for
AT91SAM9263. That code depended on the Kconfig macro
CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI and its MODULE variant. The related Kconfig symbol
has never been added to the tree. The net effect of this was that
at91_add_device_isi() was a NOP. No one noticed because no callers of
that function were added to the tree at that time.
The first caller of a function with that name was added in v3.4. But
that caller apparently only called the function defined for AT91SAM9G45.
(that function was also added in v3.4). So even then AT91SAM9263's NOP
version of at91_add_device_isi() remained unused. This means that the
ISI code for AT91SAM9263 can be removed.
Nack
this is just resources and allow until this is converted to DTS to have the
pinctrl and register information
Best Regards,
J.
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl
---
Untested!
Could someone please verify that this definition of
at91_add_device_isi() really never will be called.
arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 57
1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
index 43d53d6156dd..f2dab0a872a1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
@@ -897,63 +897,6 @@ void __init at91_add_device_lcdc(struct
atmel_lcdfb_pdata *data) {}
/*
- * Image Sensor Interface
- * */
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI) || defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI_MODULE)
-
-struct resource isi_resources[] = {
- [0] = {
- .start = AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI,
- .end= AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI + SZ_16K - 1,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
- },
- [1] = {
- .start = NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .end= NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ,
- },
-};
-
-static struct platform_device at91sam9263_isi_device = {
- .name = at91_isi,
- .id = -1,
- .resource = isi_resources,
- .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(isi_resources),
-};
-
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck)
-{
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE0, 0); /* ISI_D0 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE1, 0); /* ISI_D1 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE2, 0); /* ISI_D2 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE3, 0); /* ISI_D3 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE4, 0); /* ISI_D4 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE5, 0); /* ISI_D5 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE6, 0); /* ISI_D6 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE7, 0); /* ISI_D7 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE8, 0); /* ISI_PCK */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE9, 0); /* ISI_HSYNC */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE10, 0);/* ISI_VSYNC */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE12, 0);/* ISI_PD8 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE13, 0);/* ISI_PD9 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE14, 0);/* ISI_PD10 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE15, 0);/* ISI_PD11 */
-
- if (use_pck_as_mck) {
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE11, 0);/* ISI_MCK (PCK3) */
-
- /* TODO: register the PCK for ISI_MCK and set its parent */
- }
-}
-#else
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck) {}
-#endif
-
-
-/*
* Timer/Counter block
* */
--
1.9.0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: remove ISI code for AT91SAM9263
Hi, Paul
On 5/15/2014 4:34 PM, Paul Bolle wrote:
In v2.6.25 code was added for an Image Sensor Interface (ISI) for
AT91SAM9263. That code depended on the Kconfig macro
CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI and its MODULE variant. The related Kconfig symbol
has never been added to the tree. The net effect of this was that
at91_add_device_isi() was a NOP. No one noticed because no callers of
that function were added to the tree at that time.
The first caller of a function with that name was added in v3.4. But
that caller apparently only called the function defined for AT91SAM9G45.
(that function was also added in v3.4). So even then AT91SAM9263's NOP
version of at91_add_device_isi() remained unused. This means that the
ISI code for AT91SAM9263 can be removed.
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
---
Untested!
Could someone please verify that this definition of
at91_add_device_isi() really never will be called.
Right. There is no implement to support for at91sam9263 ISI. So in
at91sam9263ek it will not call at91_add_device_isi().
Current ISI driver only support at91sam9g45 and later chips.
Acked-by: Josh Wu
Best Regards,
Josh Wu
arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 57
1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
index 43d53d6156dd..f2dab0a872a1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
@@ -897,63 +897,6 @@ void __init at91_add_device_lcdc(struct atmel_lcdfb_pdata
*data) {}
/*
- * Image Sensor Interface
- * */
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI) || defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI_MODULE)
-
-struct resource isi_resources[] = {
- [0] = {
- .start = AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI,
- .end= AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI + SZ_16K - 1,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
- },
- [1] = {
- .start = NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .end= NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ,
- },
-};
-
-static struct platform_device at91sam9263_isi_device = {
- .name = "at91_isi",
- .id = -1,
- .resource = isi_resources,
- .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(isi_resources),
-};
-
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck)
-{
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE0, 0); /* ISI_D0 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE1, 0); /* ISI_D1 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE2, 0); /* ISI_D2 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE3, 0); /* ISI_D3 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE4, 0); /* ISI_D4 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE5, 0); /* ISI_D5 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE6, 0); /* ISI_D6 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE7, 0); /* ISI_D7 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE8, 0); /* ISI_PCK */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE9, 0); /* ISI_HSYNC */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE10, 0);/* ISI_VSYNC */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE12, 0);/* ISI_PD8 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE13, 0);/* ISI_PD9 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE14, 0);/* ISI_PD10 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE15, 0);/* ISI_PD11 */
-
- if (use_pck_as_mck) {
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE11, 0);/* ISI_MCK (PCK3) */
-
- /* TODO: register the PCK for ISI_MCK and set its parent */
- }
-}
-#else
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck) {}
-#endif
-
-
-/*
* Timer/Counter block
* */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH] ARM: at91: remove ISI code for AT91SAM9263
In v2.6.25 code was added for an Image Sensor Interface (ISI) for
AT91SAM9263. That code depended on the Kconfig macro
CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI and its MODULE variant. The related Kconfig symbol
has never been added to the tree. The net effect of this was that
at91_add_device_isi() was a NOP. No one noticed because no callers of
that function were added to the tree at that time.
The first caller of a function with that name was added in v3.4. But
that caller apparently only called the function defined for AT91SAM9G45.
(that function was also added in v3.4). So even then AT91SAM9263's NOP
version of at91_add_device_isi() remained unused. This means that the
ISI code for AT91SAM9263 can be removed.
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
---
Untested!
Could someone please verify that this definition of
at91_add_device_isi() really never will be called.
arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 57
1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
index 43d53d6156dd..f2dab0a872a1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
@@ -897,63 +897,6 @@ void __init at91_add_device_lcdc(struct atmel_lcdfb_pdata
*data) {}
/*
- * Image Sensor Interface
- * */
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI) || defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI_MODULE)
-
-struct resource isi_resources[] = {
- [0] = {
- .start = AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI,
- .end= AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI + SZ_16K - 1,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
- },
- [1] = {
- .start = NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .end= NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ,
- },
-};
-
-static struct platform_device at91sam9263_isi_device = {
- .name = "at91_isi",
- .id = -1,
- .resource = isi_resources,
- .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(isi_resources),
-};
-
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck)
-{
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE0, 0); /* ISI_D0 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE1, 0); /* ISI_D1 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE2, 0); /* ISI_D2 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE3, 0); /* ISI_D3 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE4, 0); /* ISI_D4 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE5, 0); /* ISI_D5 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE6, 0); /* ISI_D6 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE7, 0); /* ISI_D7 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE8, 0); /* ISI_PCK */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE9, 0); /* ISI_HSYNC */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE10, 0);/* ISI_VSYNC */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE12, 0);/* ISI_PD8 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE13, 0);/* ISI_PD9 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE14, 0);/* ISI_PD10 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE15, 0);/* ISI_PD11 */
-
- if (use_pck_as_mck) {
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE11, 0);/* ISI_MCK (PCK3) */
-
- /* TODO: register the PCK for ISI_MCK and set its parent */
- }
-}
-#else
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck) {}
-#endif
-
-
-/*
* Timer/Counter block
* */
--
1.9.0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH] ARM: at91: remove ISI code for AT91SAM9263
In v2.6.25 code was added for an Image Sensor Interface (ISI) for
AT91SAM9263. That code depended on the Kconfig macro
CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI and its MODULE variant. The related Kconfig symbol
has never been added to the tree. The net effect of this was that
at91_add_device_isi() was a NOP. No one noticed because no callers of
that function were added to the tree at that time.
The first caller of a function with that name was added in v3.4. But
that caller apparently only called the function defined for AT91SAM9G45.
(that function was also added in v3.4). So even then AT91SAM9263's NOP
version of at91_add_device_isi() remained unused. This means that the
ISI code for AT91SAM9263 can be removed.
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl
---
Untested!
Could someone please verify that this definition of
at91_add_device_isi() really never will be called.
arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 57
1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
index 43d53d6156dd..f2dab0a872a1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
@@ -897,63 +897,6 @@ void __init at91_add_device_lcdc(struct atmel_lcdfb_pdata
*data) {}
/*
- * Image Sensor Interface
- * */
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI) || defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI_MODULE)
-
-struct resource isi_resources[] = {
- [0] = {
- .start = AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI,
- .end= AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI + SZ_16K - 1,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
- },
- [1] = {
- .start = NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .end= NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ,
- },
-};
-
-static struct platform_device at91sam9263_isi_device = {
- .name = at91_isi,
- .id = -1,
- .resource = isi_resources,
- .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(isi_resources),
-};
-
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck)
-{
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE0, 0); /* ISI_D0 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE1, 0); /* ISI_D1 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE2, 0); /* ISI_D2 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE3, 0); /* ISI_D3 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE4, 0); /* ISI_D4 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE5, 0); /* ISI_D5 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE6, 0); /* ISI_D6 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE7, 0); /* ISI_D7 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE8, 0); /* ISI_PCK */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE9, 0); /* ISI_HSYNC */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE10, 0);/* ISI_VSYNC */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE12, 0);/* ISI_PD8 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE13, 0);/* ISI_PD9 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE14, 0);/* ISI_PD10 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE15, 0);/* ISI_PD11 */
-
- if (use_pck_as_mck) {
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE11, 0);/* ISI_MCK (PCK3) */
-
- /* TODO: register the PCK for ISI_MCK and set its parent */
- }
-}
-#else
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck) {}
-#endif
-
-
-/*
* Timer/Counter block
* */
--
1.9.0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: remove ISI code for AT91SAM9263
Hi, Paul
On 5/15/2014 4:34 PM, Paul Bolle wrote:
In v2.6.25 code was added for an Image Sensor Interface (ISI) for
AT91SAM9263. That code depended on the Kconfig macro
CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI and its MODULE variant. The related Kconfig symbol
has never been added to the tree. The net effect of this was that
at91_add_device_isi() was a NOP. No one noticed because no callers of
that function were added to the tree at that time.
The first caller of a function with that name was added in v3.4. But
that caller apparently only called the function defined for AT91SAM9G45.
(that function was also added in v3.4). So even then AT91SAM9263's NOP
version of at91_add_device_isi() remained unused. This means that the
ISI code for AT91SAM9263 can be removed.
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl
---
Untested!
Could someone please verify that this definition of
at91_add_device_isi() really never will be called.
Right. There is no implement to support for at91sam9263 ISI. So in
at91sam9263ek it will not call at91_add_device_isi().
Current ISI driver only support at91sam9g45 and later chips.
Acked-by: Josh Wu josh...@atmel.com
Best Regards,
Josh Wu
arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 57
1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
index 43d53d6156dd..f2dab0a872a1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c
@@ -897,63 +897,6 @@ void __init at91_add_device_lcdc(struct atmel_lcdfb_pdata
*data) {}
/*
- * Image Sensor Interface
- * */
-
-#if defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI) || defined(CONFIG_VIDEO_AT91_ISI_MODULE)
-
-struct resource isi_resources[] = {
- [0] = {
- .start = AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI,
- .end= AT91SAM9263_BASE_ISI + SZ_16K - 1,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
- },
- [1] = {
- .start = NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .end= NR_IRQS_LEGACY + AT91SAM9263_ID_ISI,
- .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ,
- },
-};
-
-static struct platform_device at91sam9263_isi_device = {
- .name = at91_isi,
- .id = -1,
- .resource = isi_resources,
- .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(isi_resources),
-};
-
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck)
-{
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE0, 0); /* ISI_D0 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE1, 0); /* ISI_D1 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE2, 0); /* ISI_D2 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE3, 0); /* ISI_D3 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE4, 0); /* ISI_D4 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE5, 0); /* ISI_D5 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE6, 0); /* ISI_D6 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE7, 0); /* ISI_D7 */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE8, 0); /* ISI_PCK */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE9, 0); /* ISI_HSYNC */
- at91_set_A_periph(AT91_PIN_PE10, 0);/* ISI_VSYNC */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE12, 0);/* ISI_PD8 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE13, 0);/* ISI_PD9 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE14, 0);/* ISI_PD10 */
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE15, 0);/* ISI_PD11 */
-
- if (use_pck_as_mck) {
- at91_set_B_periph(AT91_PIN_PE11, 0);/* ISI_MCK (PCK3) */
-
- /* TODO: register the PCK for ISI_MCK and set its parent */
- }
-}
-#else
-void __init at91_add_device_isi(struct isi_platform_data *data,
- bool use_pck_as_mck) {}
-#endif
-
-
-/*
* Timer/Counter block
* */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
