Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] serial: 8250_pci: Split Pericom driver | From | Jay Dolan <> | Date | Sun, 21 Nov 2021 07:36:32 -0800 |
| |
On 11/21/21 2:16 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 11:46 PM Jay Dolan <jay.dolan@accesio.com> wrote: >> On 11/19/21 6:33 AM, Jay Dolan wrote: >>> On 11/19/21 12:23 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>>> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 10:32:51PM -0800, Jay Dolan wrote: >>>>> On 11/17/21 6:57 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>>>>> Split Pericom driver to a separate module. >>>>>> While at it, re-enable high baud rates. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jay, can you, please, test this on as many hardware as you have? >>>>>> >>>>>> The series depends on the fix-series: >>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-serial/20211117145502.43645-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com/T/#u >>>> >>>>> I have my current state here: >>>>> https://github.com/accesio/linux/blob/split-pericom-driver/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pericom.c >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> * Change port type to UPIO_PORT >>>>> * Add in pericom_do_startup() because the UPF_MAGIC_MULTIPLIER doesn't >>>>> stick. >>>> >>>> Thanks, I have updated my local tree with these changes. >>>> >>>>> When I'm testing baud rates greater than baud_base I'm seeing strange >>>>> things >>>>> on the scope. >>>> >>>> Can you confirm that there are no issues with the first (fixes) series? >>> Yes. The fixes series has no issues, and was tested up to baud_base for >>> both 14 and 24 MHz crystals. >>>> I have slightly changed your set_divisor() refactoring, it may be that >>>> issue >>>> is there. >>>> >>>>> Maybe I'm just tired, and it's human error. I should be able >>>>> to get back to it and get it done on Saturday. >>>> >>>> Thank you. >> >> Latest code is still here >> https://github.com/accesio/linux/blob/split-pericom-driver/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pericom.c >> >> Changes from last update: >> * Avoid divide by zero when initializing delta > > Thanks for digging into it. But doesn't it mean that the issue is in > the fix series as I assumed before? Yes. It just happens to not get hit at any of the standard baud rates that I found in the termbits.h files. So testing didn't find it until testing rates greater than what is allowed without the magic multiplier flag. I found it when doing the math on 3000000 because that causes it with the 14 MHz crystal. > >> I retested and verified on the scope that speeds are now being set >> correctly. >> >> I have also confirmed that all of the ACCES four port cards in the >> driver do have the offset fourth port. The item I raised about PCI was a >> misunderstanding that was all on my end. > > Good to know that is not relevant. > >> Are there any other action items I should be handling? > > I think I have to issue two new iterations of each series and collect > your formal Tested-by on the second one. >
| |