From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.179]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A280DDE0F0 for ; Sun, 8 Jul 2007 04:00:29 +1000 (EST) From: Arnd Bergmann To: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH] Handle reg-shift property for of_serial ports Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 19:52:43 +0200 References: <1183784308.3066.16.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1183827083.3066.64.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <468FC849.20801@ru.mvista.com> In-Reply-To: <468FC849.20801@ru.mvista.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200707071952.44524.arnd@arndb.de> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, David Woodhouse , paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Saturday 07 July 2007, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > > the reg-shift property. I'll send a patch shortly, and I'll reorder the > > match table -- if something claims compatibility with both 8250 and > > 16550, shouldn't we drive it as the latter? >=20 > =A0 =A0 Certainly. BTW, was there really "ns8250" -- 8250 is Intel's chip? >=20 No, you're right. http://playground.sun.com/1275/proposals/Closed/Accepted/= 384-it.txt actually mentions that the the name should be "i8250". It also mentions that the compatible property should contain "pnpPNP,501" for ns16450 and=20 higher, and "pnpPNP,500" for all serial ports starting from i8250. Arnd <><