On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 09:43:07AM +0200, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <redacted>
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <redacted>
No need for two From: lines.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -636,7 +639,8 @@ static void overlay1fb_disable(struct pxafb_layer *ofb)
lcd_writel(ofb->fbi, FBR1, ofb->fbi->fdadr[DMA_OV1] | 0x3);
if (wait_for_completion_timeout(&ofb->branch_done, 1 * HZ) = 0)
- pr_warning("%s: timeout disabling overlay1\n", __func__);
+ pr_warning("%s: timeout disabling overlay1\n",
+ __func__);
No need for this change.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -687,6 +691,9 @@ static void overlay2fb_disable(struct pxafb_layer *ofb)
{
uint32_t lccr5 = lcd_readl(ofb->fbi, LCCR5);
+ if (!(lcd_readl(ofb->fbi, OVL2C1) & OVLxC1_OEN))
+ return;
+
You don't describe this change in the change log, and this wasn't in my
patch.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -696,7 +703,8 @@ static void overlay2fb_disable(struct pxafb_layer *ofb)
lcd_writel(ofb->fbi, FBR4, ofb->fbi->fdadr[DMA_OV2_Cr] | 0x3);
if (wait_for_completion_timeout(&ofb->branch_done, 1 * HZ) = 0)
- pr_warning("%s: timeout disabling overlay2\n", __func__);
+ pr_warning("%s: timeout disabling overlay2\n",
+ __func__);
No need for this change.