[PATCH 1/2] imx: Add save/restore functions for UART control regs

[s.hauer@pengutronix.de (Sascha Hauer)]

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 07:49:56AM +0100, Dirk Behme wrote:
> On 19.12.2011 04:49, Shawn Guo wrote:
> >On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 06:34:14PM +0100, Dirk Behme wrote:
> >>Factor out the uart save/restore functionality instead of
> >>having the same code several times in the driver.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme<dirk.behme@gmail.com>
> >>CC: Saleem Abdulrasool<compnerd@compnerd.org>
> >>CC: Sascha Hauer<s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
> >>CC: Fabio Estevam<festevam@gmail.com>
> >>CC: Uwe Kleine-K?nig<u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> >>CC: linux-serial at vger.kernel.org
> >>---
> >>  drivers/tty/serial/imx.c |   38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >>  1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/imx.c b/drivers/tty/serial/imx.c
> >>index 163fc90..6a01c2a 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/tty/serial/imx.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/imx.c
> >>@@ -260,6 +260,31 @@ static inline int is_imx21_uart(struct imx_port *sport)
> >>  }
> >>
> >>  /*
> >>+ * Save and restore functions for UCR1, UCR2 and UCR3 registers
> >>+ */
> >>+static void imx_console_mode(struct uart_port *port,
> >
> >Function name imx_console_mode seems not like a couple with
> >imx_console_restore.  And I guess something like
> >imx_port_ucrs_save[restore] would be better?
> >
> >>+			     unsigned int *ucr1,
> >>+			     unsigned int *ucr2,
> >>+			     unsigned int *ucr3)
> >
> >Can we define something like 'struct imx_port_ucrs' to contains these?
> 
> Yes, we could have different function names above and use a struct.
> 
> I implemented what Sascha asked for in
> 
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg144960.html
> 
> though:
> 
> -- Sascha wrote: --
> I'm thinking about:
> 
> imx_console_mode(struct uart_port *port, u32 *ucr1, u32 *ucr2, u32 *ucr2);
> imx_console_restore(struct uart_port *port, u32 ucr1, u32 ucr2, u32 ucr3);
> -- Sascha end --
> 
> It seems Shawn proposes
> 
> imx_port_ucrs_save(struct uart_port *port, struct *imx_port_ucrs);
> imx_port_ucrs_restore(struct uart_port *port, struct *imx_port_ucrs);
> 
> (?)
> 
> Sascha, Shawn: Could you agree on what we should use?

I think save/restore are better names.
Maybe I thought about a function which saves the current values *and*
sets ucrx to other values. In that case imx_port_ucrs_save() would be
the wrong name.

> 
> Once you agreed, I will send an update of both two patches.

+1 for save/restore

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |