lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 1/2] serial: rewrite pxa2xx-uart to use 8250_core
    Date
    Sergei Ianovich <ynvich@gmail.com> writes:

    > On Sat, 2015-12-19 at 14:26 +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
    >> Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr> writes:
    >>
    >> > Sergei Ianovich <ynvich@gmail.com> writes:
    >> >
    >> > > pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
    >> > > the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
    >> > > it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
    >> > >
    >> > > Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned out to be a clone of
    >> > > 8250_core driver.
    >> > >
    >> > > Workaround for Erratum #19 according to Marvel(R) PXA270M
    >> > > Processor
    >> > > Specification Update (April 19, 2010) is dropped. 8250_core reads
    >> > > from FIFO immediately after checking DR bit in LSR.
    >> > >
    >> > > Signed-off-by: Sergei Ianovich <ynvich@gmail.com>
    >> > > Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
    >> > > Reviewed-by: James Cameron <quozl@laptop.org>
    >> > > Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
    >> > Tested-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
    >>
    >> Shrunk the list, the following is rather mach-pxa specific.
    >>
    >> Actually there is a small glitch ...
    >> Have a look at arch/arm/mach-pxa/viper.c, line 490:
    >> #ifndef CONFIG_SERIAL_PXA
    >> ...
    >
    > Thanks for spotting this. This is caused by a change in the latest
    > version of the patch (SERIAL_8250_PXA instead of SERIAL_PXA). This
    > change could be reverted.
    Actually I'm against the revert.
    The name change looks very good to me, please keep it.

    >> But that can be handled in an subsequent patch to keep your acks and
    >> reviews.
    > I will respin the patch. Please comment on the acks and reviews. They
    > were made at an earlier version of the patch. That version no longer
    > applies. Can the updated version carry on the flags?
    I don't get you. If you mean keeping CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_PXA, then yes, please
    keep it.

    Cheers.
    --
    Robert


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2015-12-19 20:41    [W:4.110 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site