From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] serial/8250: Adjusting FIFO parameters for LPC32xx Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 12:07:36 +0000 Message-ID: <201205271207.36770.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1338048678-23991-1-git-send-email-stigge@antcom.de> <201205271023.16742.arnd@arndb.de> <4FC21214.7060804@antcom.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:61555 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751024Ab2E0MIZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 May 2012 08:08:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4FC21214.7060804@antcom.de> Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org To: Roland Stigge Cc: alan@linux.intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kevin.wells@nxp.com, srinivas.bakki@nxp.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Sunday 27 May 2012, Roland Stigge wrote: > > Actually some of the other entries are wrong, too. The ns8250 entry should > > be i8250, and I guess the 16750 and 16850 were also not made by national. > > But maybe we should keep the existing compatible strings because > existing boards/bootloaders are providing them already? Right, we should only add to the list. Any entry that's already used potentially needs to stay in there as you say. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 12:07:36 +0000 Subject: [PATCH RFC] serial/8250: Adjusting FIFO parameters for LPC32xx In-Reply-To: <4FC21214.7060804@antcom.de> References: <1338048678-23991-1-git-send-email-stigge@antcom.de> <201205271023.16742.arnd@arndb.de> <4FC21214.7060804@antcom.de> Message-ID: <201205271207.36770.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sunday 27 May 2012, Roland Stigge wrote: > > Actually some of the other entries are wrong, too. The ns8250 entry should > > be i8250, and I guess the 16750 and 16850 were also not made by national. > > But maybe we should keep the existing compatible strings because > existing boards/bootloaders are providing them already? Right, we should only add to the list. Any entry that's already used potentially needs to stay in there as you say. Arnd