2010-08-19 18:37:04

by Henrique Camargo

Subject: [PATCH] mt9t031: Fixes field names that changed

If CONFIG_VIDEO_ADV_DEBUG was set, the driver failed to compile
because the fields get_register and set_register changed names to
g_register and s_register in the struct v4l2_subdev_core_ops.

Signed-off-by: Henrique Camargo <[email protected]>
---
drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c b/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
index 716fea6..f3d1995 100644
--- a/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
+++ b/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
@@ -499,8 +499,8 @@ static const struct v4l2_subdev_core_ops mt9t031_core_ops = {
.g_ctrl = mt9t031_get_control,
.s_ctrl = mt9t031_set_control,
#ifdef CONFIG_VIDEO_ADV_DEBUG
- .get_register = mt9t031_get_register,
- .set_register = mt9t031_set_register,
+ .g_register = mt9t031_get_register,
+ .s_register = mt9t031_set_register,
#endif
};

--
1.7.0.4

2010-08-24 22:23:26

by Guennadi Liakhovetski

Subject: Re: [PATCH] mt9t031: Fixes field names that changed

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Henrique Camargo wrote:

> If CONFIG_VIDEO_ADV_DEBUG was set, the driver failed to compile
> because the fields get_register and set_register changed names to
> g_register and s_register in the struct v4l2_subdev_core_ops.
>
> Signed-off-by: Henrique Camargo <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c b/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
> index 716fea6..f3d1995 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/video/mt9t031.c
> @@ -499,8 +499,8 @@ static const struct v4l2_subdev_core_ops mt9t031_core_ops = {
> .g_ctrl = mt9t031_get_control,
> .s_ctrl = mt9t031_set_control,
> #ifdef CONFIG_VIDEO_ADV_DEBUG
> - .get_register = mt9t031_get_register,
> - .set_register = mt9t031_set_register,
> + .g_register = mt9t031_get_register,
> + .s_register = mt9t031_set_register,
> #endif
> };
>
> --
> 1.7.0.4

I might be missing something obvious, but I do not understand against
which tree / version is this patch? I don't see this problem in the
mainline.

Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/