* [PATCH v3 0/4] omap-serial high-speed fixes/improvements
@ 2014-09-15 14:00 Frans Klaver
2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 1/4] tty: omap-serial: pull out calculation from baud_is_mode16 Frans Klaver
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tony Lindgren
Cc: Frans Klaver, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland,
Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh,
Jiri Slaby, linux-serial, linux-omap, devicetree,
linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel
Hi,
Here's version 3 of my fixes for high speed usage of the omap serial driver.
Sebastian's 8250 based implementation doesn't seem to be quite there yet. As
long as that's the case, I'd like to go ahead with improving this series.
v2..v3
- fix an undefined variable in "prevent division by zero"
- use IRQ_ONESHOT for the threaded irq in "use threaded interrupt handler"
v1..v2
- centralize baud_is_mode16's calculation
- fix/unbreak an uninitialized variable in "use threaded interrupt handler"
- read has-hw-flow-control property in of_get_uart_port_info
Frans Klaver (4):
tty: omap-serial: pull out calculation from baud_is_mode16
tty: omap-serial: prevent division by zero
tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler
tty: omap-serial: support setting of hardware flow control in dts
.../devicetree/bindings/serial/omap_serial.txt | 1 +
drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++-----
2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
--
2.1.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [PATCH 1/4] tty: omap-serial: pull out calculation from baud_is_mode16 2014-09-15 14:00 [PATCH v3 0/4] omap-serial high-speed fixes/improvements Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 ` Frans Klaver 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 2/4] tty: omap-serial: prevent division by zero Frans Klaver ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Frans Klaver, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland, Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh, Jiri Slaby, linux-serial, linux-omap, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel To determine the correct divisor, we need to know the difference between the desired baud rate and the actual baud rate. The calculation for this difference is implemented twice within omap_serial_baud_is_mode16(). Pull out the calculation for easier maintenance. Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <frans.klaver@xsens.com> --- drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c index d017cec..ae935ce 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c @@ -239,6 +239,22 @@ static void serial_omap_enable_wakeup(struct uart_omap_port *up, bool enable) } /* + * Calculate the absolute difference between the desired and actual baud + * rate for the given mode. + */ +static inline int calculate_baud_abs_diff(struct uart_port *port, + unsigned int baud, unsigned int mode) +{ + unsigned int n = port->uartclk / (mode * baud); + int abs_diff = baud - (port->uartclk / (mode * n)); + + if (abs_diff < 0) + abs_diff = -abs_diff; + + return abs_diff; +} + +/* * serial_omap_baud_is_mode16 - check if baud rate is MODE16X * @port: uart port info * @baud: baudrate for which mode needs to be determined @@ -252,14 +268,8 @@ static void serial_omap_enable_wakeup(struct uart_omap_port *up, bool enable) static bool serial_omap_baud_is_mode16(struct uart_port *port, unsigned int baud) { - unsigned int n13 = port->uartclk / (13 * baud); - unsigned int n16 = port->uartclk / (16 * baud); - int baudAbsDiff13 = baud - (port->uartclk / (13 * n13)); - int baudAbsDiff16 = baud - (port->uartclk / (16 * n16)); - if (baudAbsDiff13 < 0) - baudAbsDiff13 = -baudAbsDiff13; - if (baudAbsDiff16 < 0) - baudAbsDiff16 = -baudAbsDiff16; + int baudAbsDiff13 = calculate_baud_abs_diff(port, baud, 13); + int baudAbsDiff16 = calculate_baud_abs_diff(port, baud, 16); return (baudAbsDiff13 >= baudAbsDiff16); } -- 2.1.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/4] tty: omap-serial: prevent division by zero 2014-09-15 14:00 [PATCH v3 0/4] omap-serial high-speed fixes/improvements Frans Klaver 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 1/4] tty: omap-serial: pull out calculation from baud_is_mode16 Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 ` Frans Klaver 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler Frans Klaver 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 4/4] tty: omap-serial: support setting of hardware flow control in dts Frans Klaver 3 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Mark Rutland, Frans Klaver, Alexey Pelykh, Pawel Moll, Ian Campbell, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-kernel, Felipe Balbi, devicetree, Rob Herring, linux-serial, Kumar Gala, linux-omap, Jiri Slaby, linux-arm-kernel If the chosen baud rate is large enough (e.g. 3.5 megabaud), the calculated n values in calculate_baud_abs_diff may become 0. This causes a division by zero when calculating the difference between calculated and desired baud rates. To prevent this, cap n on 1. Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <frans.klaver@xsens.com> --- drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c index ae935ce..7d3f557 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c @@ -246,8 +246,12 @@ static inline int calculate_baud_abs_diff(struct uart_port *port, unsigned int baud, unsigned int mode) { unsigned int n = port->uartclk / (mode * baud); - int abs_diff = baud - (port->uartclk / (mode * n)); + int abs_diff; + if (n == 0) + n = 1; + + abs_diff = baud - (port->uartclk / (mode * n)); if (abs_diff < 0) abs_diff = -abs_diff; -- 2.1.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler 2014-09-15 14:00 [PATCH v3 0/4] omap-serial high-speed fixes/improvements Frans Klaver 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 1/4] tty: omap-serial: pull out calculation from baud_is_mode16 Frans Klaver 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 2/4] tty: omap-serial: prevent division by zero Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 ` Frans Klaver 2014-09-15 15:39 ` Peter Hurley 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 4/4] tty: omap-serial: support setting of hardware flow control in dts Frans Klaver 3 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Frans Klaver, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland, Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh, Jiri Slaby, linux-serial, linux-omap, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see 1600 uart rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt handling reduces this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. In practice this therefore reduces the need for hardware flow control, meaning the sending side doesn't have to buffer as much either. Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <frans.klaver@xsens.com> --- drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c index 7d3f557..398139a 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c @@ -575,6 +575,20 @@ static void serial_omap_rdi(struct uart_omap_port *up, unsigned int lsr) } /** + * serial_omap_fast_irq() - schedule interrupt handling + */ +static irqreturn_t serial_omap_fast_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) +{ + struct uart_omap_port *up = dev_id; + unsigned int iir = serial_in(up, UART_IIR); + + if (iir & UART_IIR_NO_INT) + return IRQ_NONE; + + return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD; +} + +/** * serial_omap_irq() - This handles the interrupt from one port * @irq: uart port irq number * @dev_id: uart port info @@ -584,7 +598,6 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) struct uart_omap_port *up = dev_id; unsigned int iir, lsr; unsigned int type; - irqreturn_t ret = IRQ_NONE; int max_count = 256; spin_lock(&up->port.lock); @@ -595,7 +608,6 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) if (iir & UART_IIR_NO_INT) break; - ret = IRQ_HANDLED; lsr = serial_in(up, UART_LSR); /* extract IRQ type from IIR register */ @@ -634,7 +646,7 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(up->dev); up->port_activity = jiffies; - return ret; + return IRQ_HANDLED; } static unsigned int serial_omap_tx_empty(struct uart_port *port) @@ -731,15 +743,19 @@ static int serial_omap_startup(struct uart_port *port) /* * Allocate the IRQ */ - retval = request_irq(up->port.irq, serial_omap_irq, up->port.irqflags, - up->name, up); + retval = request_threaded_irq(up->port.irq, serial_omap_fast_irq, + serial_omap_irq, + IRQF_ONESHOT | up->port.irqflags, + up->name, up); if (retval) return retval; /* Optional wake-up IRQ */ if (up->wakeirq) { - retval = request_irq(up->wakeirq, serial_omap_irq, - up->port.irqflags, up->name, up); + retval = request_threaded_irq(up->wakeirq, serial_omap_fast_irq, + serial_omap_irq, + IRQF_ONESHOT | up->port.irqflags, + up->name, up); if (retval) { free_irq(up->port.irq, up); return retval; -- 2.1.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 15:39 ` Peter Hurley [not found] ` <54170823.7040801-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Peter Hurley @ 2014-09-15 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frans Klaver, Tony Lindgren Cc: Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland, Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh, Jiri Slaby, linux-serial, linux-omap, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel On 09/15/2014 10:00 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: > At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see 1600 uart > rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt handling reduces > this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. Why is the threadirqs kernel boot option not sufficient? Or conversely, shouldn't this be selectable? Regards, Peter Hurley PS - To overflow the 64 byte RX FIFO at those data rates means interrupt latency in excess of 250us? > In practice this therefore reduces the need for hardware flow control, > meaning the sending side doesn't have to buffer as much either. > > Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <frans.klaver@xsens.com> > --- > drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > index 7d3f557..398139a 100644 > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > @@ -575,6 +575,20 @@ static void serial_omap_rdi(struct uart_omap_port *up, unsigned int lsr) > } > > /** > + * serial_omap_fast_irq() - schedule interrupt handling > + */ > +static irqreturn_t serial_omap_fast_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > +{ > + struct uart_omap_port *up = dev_id; > + unsigned int iir = serial_in(up, UART_IIR); > + > + if (iir & UART_IIR_NO_INT) > + return IRQ_NONE; > + > + return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD; > +} > + > +/** > * serial_omap_irq() - This handles the interrupt from one port > * @irq: uart port irq number > * @dev_id: uart port info > @@ -584,7 +598,6 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > struct uart_omap_port *up = dev_id; > unsigned int iir, lsr; > unsigned int type; > - irqreturn_t ret = IRQ_NONE; > int max_count = 256; > > spin_lock(&up->port.lock); > @@ -595,7 +608,6 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > if (iir & UART_IIR_NO_INT) > break; > > - ret = IRQ_HANDLED; > lsr = serial_in(up, UART_LSR); > > /* extract IRQ type from IIR register */ > @@ -634,7 +646,7 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(up->dev); > up->port_activity = jiffies; > > - return ret; > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > } > > static unsigned int serial_omap_tx_empty(struct uart_port *port) > @@ -731,15 +743,19 @@ static int serial_omap_startup(struct uart_port *port) > /* > * Allocate the IRQ > */ > - retval = request_irq(up->port.irq, serial_omap_irq, up->port.irqflags, > - up->name, up); > + retval = request_threaded_irq(up->port.irq, serial_omap_fast_irq, > + serial_omap_irq, > + IRQF_ONESHOT | up->port.irqflags, > + up->name, up); > if (retval) > return retval; > > /* Optional wake-up IRQ */ > if (up->wakeirq) { > - retval = request_irq(up->wakeirq, serial_omap_irq, > - up->port.irqflags, up->name, up); > + retval = request_threaded_irq(up->wakeirq, serial_omap_fast_irq, > + serial_omap_irq, > + IRQF_ONESHOT | up->port.irqflags, > + up->name, up); > if (retval) { > free_irq(up->port.irq, up); > return retval; > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <54170823.7040801-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler [not found] ` <54170823.7040801-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> @ 2014-09-15 17:31 ` Peter Hurley 2014-09-16 8:50 ` Frans Klaver 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Peter Hurley @ 2014-09-15 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frans Klaver, Tony Lindgren Cc: Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland, Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh, Jiri Slaby, linux-serial-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA On 09/15/2014 11:39 AM, Peter Hurley wrote: > On 09/15/2014 10:00 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: >> At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see 1600 uart >> rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt handling reduces >> this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. > > Why is the threadirqs kernel boot option not sufficient? > Or conversely, shouldn't this be selectable? Also, do you see the same performance differential when you implement this in the 8250 driver (that is, on top of Sebastian's omap->8250 conversion)? > Regards, > Peter Hurley > > PS - To overflow the 64 byte RX FIFO at those data rates means interrupt > latency in excess of 250us? > >> In practice this therefore reduces the need for hardware flow control, >> meaning the sending side doesn't have to buffer as much either. >> >> Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <frans.klaver-MHHw4NDrbWwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> --- >> drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c >> index 7d3f557..398139a 100644 >> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c >> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c >> @@ -575,6 +575,20 @@ static void serial_omap_rdi(struct uart_omap_port *up, unsigned int lsr) >> } >> >> /** >> + * serial_omap_fast_irq() - schedule interrupt handling >> + */ >> +static irqreturn_t serial_omap_fast_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) >> +{ >> + struct uart_omap_port *up = dev_id; >> + unsigned int iir = serial_in(up, UART_IIR); >> + >> + if (iir & UART_IIR_NO_INT) >> + return IRQ_NONE; >> + >> + return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD; >> +} >> + >> +/** >> * serial_omap_irq() - This handles the interrupt from one port >> * @irq: uart port irq number >> * @dev_id: uart port info >> @@ -584,7 +598,6 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) >> struct uart_omap_port *up = dev_id; >> unsigned int iir, lsr; >> unsigned int type; >> - irqreturn_t ret = IRQ_NONE; >> int max_count = 256; >> >> spin_lock(&up->port.lock); >> @@ -595,7 +608,6 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) >> if (iir & UART_IIR_NO_INT) >> break; >> >> - ret = IRQ_HANDLED; >> lsr = serial_in(up, UART_LSR); >> >> /* extract IRQ type from IIR register */ >> @@ -634,7 +646,7 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) >> pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(up->dev); >> up->port_activity = jiffies; >> >> - return ret; >> + return IRQ_HANDLED; >> } >> >> static unsigned int serial_omap_tx_empty(struct uart_port *port) >> @@ -731,15 +743,19 @@ static int serial_omap_startup(struct uart_port *port) >> /* >> * Allocate the IRQ >> */ >> - retval = request_irq(up->port.irq, serial_omap_irq, up->port.irqflags, >> - up->name, up); >> + retval = request_threaded_irq(up->port.irq, serial_omap_fast_irq, >> + serial_omap_irq, >> + IRQF_ONESHOT | up->port.irqflags, >> + up->name, up); >> if (retval) >> return retval; >> >> /* Optional wake-up IRQ */ >> if (up->wakeirq) { >> - retval = request_irq(up->wakeirq, serial_omap_irq, >> - up->port.irqflags, up->name, up); >> + retval = request_threaded_irq(up->wakeirq, serial_omap_fast_irq, >> + serial_omap_irq, >> + IRQF_ONESHOT | up->port.irqflags, >> + up->name, up); >> if (retval) { >> free_irq(up->port.irq, up); >> return retval; >> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler 2014-09-15 17:31 ` Peter Hurley @ 2014-09-16 8:50 ` Frans Klaver 2014-09-17 12:01 ` Peter Hurley 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-16 8:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Peter Hurley Cc: Tony Lindgren, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland, Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh, Jiri Slaby, linux-serial, linux-omap, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 01:31:56PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: > On 09/15/2014 11:39 AM, Peter Hurley wrote: > > On 09/15/2014 10:00 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: > >> At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see 1600 uart > >> rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt handling reduces > >> this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. > > > > Why is the threadirqs kernel boot option not sufficient? > > Or conversely, shouldn't this be selectable? > I wasn't aware of the threadirqs boot option. I also wouldn't know if this should be selectable. What would be a reason to favor the non-threaded irq over the threaded irq? > Also, do you see the same performance differential when you implement this > in the 8250 driver (that is, on top of Sebastian's omap->8250 conversion)? > I haven't gotten Sebastian's driver to work properly yet on the console. There was no reason for me yet to throw my omap changes on top of Sebastian's queue. > > PS - To overflow the 64 byte RX FIFO at those data rates means interrupt > > latency in excess of 250us? At 3686400 baud it should take about 174 us to fill a 64 byte buffer. I haven't done any measurements on the interrupt latency though. If you consider that we're sending about 1kB of data, 240 times a second, we're spending a lot of time reading data from the uart. I can imagine the system has other work to do as well. This doesn't mean that we're not interested in Sebastian's driver anymore though. We really want that dma support. Thanks, Frans ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler 2014-09-16 8:50 ` Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-17 12:01 ` Peter Hurley 2014-09-17 12:13 ` Frans Klaver 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Peter Hurley @ 2014-09-17 12:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frans Klaver Cc: Tony Lindgren, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland, Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh, Jiri Slaby, linux-serial, linux-omap, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel On 09/16/2014 04:50 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 01:31:56PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: >> On 09/15/2014 11:39 AM, Peter Hurley wrote: >>> On 09/15/2014 10:00 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: >>>> At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see 1600 uart >>>> rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt handling reduces >>>> this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. >>> >>> Why is the threadirqs kernel boot option not sufficient? >>> Or conversely, shouldn't this be selectable? >> > > I wasn't aware of the threadirqs boot option. I also wouldn't know if > this should be selectable. What would be a reason to favor the > non-threaded irq over the threaded irq? Not everyone cares enough about serial to dedicate kthreads to it :) >> Also, do you see the same performance differential when you implement this >> in the 8250 driver (that is, on top of Sebastian's omap->8250 conversion)? >> > > I haven't gotten Sebastian's driver to work properly yet on the console. > There was no reason for me yet to throw my omap changes on top of > Sebastian's queue. > >>> PS - To overflow the 64 byte RX FIFO at those data rates means interrupt >>> latency in excess of 250us? > > At 3686400 baud it should take about 174 us to fill a 64 byte buffer. I > haven't done any measurements on the interrupt latency though. If you > consider that we're sending about 1kB of data, 240 times a second, we're > spending a lot of time reading data from the uart. I can imagine the > system has other work to do as well. System work should not keep irqs from being serviced. Even 174us is a long time not to service an interrupt. Maybe console writes are keeping the isr from running? Regards, Peter Hurley ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler 2014-09-17 12:01 ` Peter Hurley @ 2014-09-17 12:13 ` Frans Klaver 2014-09-23 8:24 ` Frans Klaver 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-17 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Peter Hurley Cc: Tony Lindgren, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland, Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh, Jiri Slaby, linux-serial, linux-omap, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 08:01:08AM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: > On 09/16/2014 04:50 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 01:31:56PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: > >> On 09/15/2014 11:39 AM, Peter Hurley wrote: > >>> On 09/15/2014 10:00 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: > >>>> At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see 1600 uart > >>>> rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt handling reduces > >>>> this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. > >>> > >>> Why is the threadirqs kernel boot option not sufficient? > >>> Or conversely, shouldn't this be selectable? > >> > > > > I wasn't aware of the threadirqs boot option. I also wouldn't know if > > this should be selectable. What would be a reason to favor the > > non-threaded irq over the threaded irq? > > Not everyone cares enough about serial to dedicate kthreads to it :) Fair enough. In that light, we might not care enough about other subsystems to dedicate kthreads to it :). Selectable seems reasonable in that case. > >> Also, do you see the same performance differential when you implement this > >> in the 8250 driver (that is, on top of Sebastian's omap->8250 conversion)? > >> > > > > I haven't gotten Sebastian's driver to work properly yet on the console. > > There was no reason for me yet to throw my omap changes on top of > > Sebastian's queue. > > > >>> PS - To overflow the 64 byte RX FIFO at those data rates means interrupt > >>> latency in excess of 250us? > > > > At 3686400 baud it should take about 174 us to fill a 64 byte buffer. I > > haven't done any measurements on the interrupt latency though. If you > > consider that we're sending about 1kB of data, 240 times a second, we're > > spending a lot of time reading data from the uart. I can imagine the > > system has other work to do as well. > > System work should not keep irqs from being serviced. Even 174us is a long > time not to service an interrupt. Maybe console writes are keeping the isr > from running? That's quite possible. I'll have to redo the test setup I had for this to give you a decent answer. I'll have to do that anyway as Sebastian's 8250 conversion improves. Thanks for the comments, Frans ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler 2014-09-17 12:13 ` Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-23 8:24 ` Frans Klaver [not found] ` <20140923082445.GA16218-fflvphBLEC9V3v/g3MTWbjg1oUeLRpcR@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-23 8:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Peter Hurley Cc: Mark Rutland, devicetree, Pawel Moll, Ian Campbell, Tony Lindgren, Alexey Pelykh, Kumar Gala, linux-kernel, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, linux-serial, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-omap, Jiri Slaby, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 02:13:03PM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote: > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 08:01:08AM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: > > On 09/16/2014 04:50 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 01:31:56PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: > > >> On 09/15/2014 11:39 AM, Peter Hurley wrote: > > >>> On 09/15/2014 10:00 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: > > >>>> At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see 1600 uart > > >>>> rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt handling reduces > > >>>> this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. > > >>> > > >>> Why is the threadirqs kernel boot option not sufficient? > > >>> Or conversely, shouldn't this be selectable? > > >> > > > > > > I wasn't aware of the threadirqs boot option. I also wouldn't know if > > > this should be selectable. What would be a reason to favor the > > > non-threaded irq over the threaded irq? > > > > Not everyone cares enough about serial to dedicate kthreads to it :) > > Fair enough. In that light, we might not care enough about other > subsystems to dedicate kthreads to it :). Selectable seems reasonable in > that case. > > > > >> Also, do you see the same performance differential when you implement this > > >> in the 8250 driver (that is, on top of Sebastian's omap->8250 conversion)? > > >> > > > > > > I haven't gotten Sebastian's driver to work properly yet on the console. > > > There was no reason for me yet to throw my omap changes on top of > > > Sebastian's queue. Doing the threaded interrupt change on the 8250 driver doesn't seem as trivial. Unless I'm mistaken, that version of this patch would mess with all other 8250 based serial drivers, if it's done properly. Incidentally I did try using threadirqs, but that didn't give my any significant results. I mostly noticed a difference in the console. > > > > > >>> PS - To overflow the 64 byte RX FIFO at those data rates means interrupt > > >>> latency in excess of 250us? > > > > > > At 3686400 baud it should take about 174 us to fill a 64 byte buffer. I > > > haven't done any measurements on the interrupt latency though. If you > > > consider that we're sending about 1kB of data, 240 times a second, we're > > > spending a lot of time reading data from the uart. I can imagine the > > > system has other work to do as well. > > > > System work should not keep irqs from being serviced. Even 174us is a long > > time not to service an interrupt. Maybe console writes are keeping the isr > > from running? > > That's quite possible. I'll have to redo the test setup I had for this to > give you a decent answer. I'll have to do that anyway as Sebastian's > 8250 conversion improves. I haven't had time yet to look into this any further. I'll accept that this patch may fix a case most people aren't the least interested in. I'll also happily accept that I probably need a better argumentation than "this works better for us".Would it make sense to drop this patch and resubmit the other three? As I mentioned in the previous run, I think these are useful in any case. Thanks, Frans ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20140923082445.GA16218-fflvphBLEC9V3v/g3MTWbjg1oUeLRpcR@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler [not found] ` <20140923082445.GA16218-fflvphBLEC9V3v/g3MTWbjg1oUeLRpcR@public.gmane.org> @ 2014-09-23 17:17 ` Peter Hurley [not found] ` <5421AB20.8040606-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Peter Hurley @ 2014-09-23 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frans Klaver Cc: Mark Rutland, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Alexey Pelykh, Pawel Moll, Ian Campbell, Tony Lindgren, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, linux-serial-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Kumar Gala, linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Jiri Slaby, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r On 09/23/2014 04:24 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 02:13:03PM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 08:01:08AM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: >>> On 09/16/2014 04:50 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: >>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 01:31:56PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: >>>>> On 09/15/2014 11:39 AM, Peter Hurley wrote: >>>>>> On 09/15/2014 10:00 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: >>>>>>> At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see 1600 uart >>>>>>> rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt handling reduces >>>>>>> this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why is the threadirqs kernel boot option not sufficient? >>>>>> Or conversely, shouldn't this be selectable? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I wasn't aware of the threadirqs boot option. I also wouldn't know if >>>> this should be selectable. What would be a reason to favor the >>>> non-threaded irq over the threaded irq? >>> >>> Not everyone cares enough about serial to dedicate kthreads to it :) >> >> Fair enough. In that light, we might not care enough about other >> subsystems to dedicate kthreads to it :). Selectable seems reasonable in >> that case. >> >> >>>>> Also, do you see the same performance differential when you implement this >>>>> in the 8250 driver (that is, on top of Sebastian's omap->8250 conversion)? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I haven't gotten Sebastian's driver to work properly yet on the console. >>>> There was no reason for me yet to throw my omap changes on top of >>>> Sebastian's queue. > > Doing the threaded interrupt change on the 8250 driver doesn't seem as > trivial. Unless I'm mistaken, that version of this patch would mess with > all other 8250 based serial drivers, if it's done properly. Incidentally > I did try using threadirqs, but that didn't give my any significant > results. I mostly noticed a difference in the console. > > >>>> >>>>>> PS - To overflow the 64 byte RX FIFO at those data rates means interrupt >>>>>> latency in excess of 250us? >>>> >>>> At 3686400 baud it should take about 174 us to fill a 64 byte buffer. I >>>> haven't done any measurements on the interrupt latency though. If you >>>> consider that we're sending about 1kB of data, 240 times a second, we're >>>> spending a lot of time reading data from the uart. I can imagine the >>>> system has other work to do as well. >>> >>> System work should not keep irqs from being serviced. Even 174us is a long >>> time not to service an interrupt. Maybe console writes are keeping the isr >>> from running? >> >> That's quite possible. I'll have to redo the test setup I had for this to >> give you a decent answer. I'll have to do that anyway as Sebastian's >> 8250 conversion improves. > > I haven't had time yet to look into this any further. I'll accept that > this patch may fix a case most people aren't the least interested in. > I'll also happily accept that I probably need a better argumentation > than "this works better for us".Would it make sense to drop this patch > and resubmit the other three? As I mentioned in the previous run, I > think these are useful in any case. I would've thought the first 2 patches had already been picked up because they fix div-by-zero faults. I don't really have a problem with the patch (except for it should be selectable, even if that's just a CONFIG_ setting). At the same time, the performance results don't really make sense; so if there's actually an underlying problem, I'd rather that get addressed (and the long interrupt latency may be the underlying problem). As far as the 8250 driver and threaded irqs go, I just was hoping for another data point with a simple hard-coded test jig, not a full-blown patch series for all of them. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Regards, Peter Hurley -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <5421AB20.8040606-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler [not found] ` <5421AB20.8040606-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> @ 2014-09-23 18:11 ` Frans Klaver 2014-09-23 18:38 ` Tony Lindgren 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-23 18:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Peter Hurley, Frans Klaver Cc: Mark Rutland, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Pawel Moll, Ian Campbell, Tony Lindgren, Alexey Pelykh, Kumar Gala, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, linux-serial-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Jiri Slaby, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r On 23 September 2014 19:17:20 CEST, Peter Hurley <peter-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> wrote: >On 09/23/2014 04:24 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 02:13:03PM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 08:01:08AM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: >>>> On 09/16/2014 04:50 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 01:31:56PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: >>>>>> On 09/15/2014 11:39 AM, Peter Hurley wrote: >>>>>>> On 09/15/2014 10:00 AM, Frans Klaver wrote: >>>>>>>> At 3.6Mbaud, with slightly over 2Mbit/s data coming in, we see >1600 uart >>>>>>>> rx buffer overflows within 30 seconds. Threading the interrupt >handling reduces >>>>>>>> this to about 170 overflows in 10 minutes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why is the threadirqs kernel boot option not sufficient? >>>>>>> Or conversely, shouldn't this be selectable? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I wasn't aware of the threadirqs boot option. I also wouldn't know >if >>>>> this should be selectable. What would be a reason to favor the >>>>> non-threaded irq over the threaded irq? >>>> >>>> Not everyone cares enough about serial to dedicate kthreads to it >:) >>> >>> Fair enough. In that light, we might not care enough about other >>> subsystems to dedicate kthreads to it :). Selectable seems >reasonable in >>> that case. >>> >>> >>>>>> Also, do you see the same performance differential when you >implement this >>>>>> in the 8250 driver (that is, on top of Sebastian's omap->8250 >conversion)? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I haven't gotten Sebastian's driver to work properly yet on the >console. >>>>> There was no reason for me yet to throw my omap changes on top of >>>>> Sebastian's queue. >> >> Doing the threaded interrupt change on the 8250 driver doesn't seem >as >> trivial. Unless I'm mistaken, that version of this patch would mess >with >> all other 8250 based serial drivers, if it's done properly. >Incidentally >> I did try using threadirqs, but that didn't give my any significant >> results. I mostly noticed a difference in the console. >> >> >>>>> >>>>>>> PS - To overflow the 64 byte RX FIFO at those data rates means >interrupt >>>>>>> latency in excess of 250us? >>>>> >>>>> At 3686400 baud it should take about 174 us to fill a 64 byte >buffer. I >>>>> haven't done any measurements on the interrupt latency though. If >you >>>>> consider that we're sending about 1kB of data, 240 times a second, >we're >>>>> spending a lot of time reading data from the uart. I can imagine >the >>>>> system has other work to do as well. >>>> >>>> System work should not keep irqs from being serviced. Even 174us is >a long >>>> time not to service an interrupt. Maybe console writes are keeping >the isr >>>> from running? >>> >>> That's quite possible. I'll have to redo the test setup I had for >this to >>> give you a decent answer. I'll have to do that anyway as Sebastian's >>> 8250 conversion improves. >> >> I haven't had time yet to look into this any further. I'll accept >that >> this patch may fix a case most people aren't the least interested in. >> I'll also happily accept that I probably need a better argumentation >> than "this works better for us".Would it make sense to drop this >patch >> and resubmit the other three? As I mentioned in the previous run, I >> think these are useful in any case. > >I would've thought the first 2 patches had already been picked up >because >they fix div-by-zero faults. I've had no confirmation of that happening so far. I also don't know if I should expect one. Who'd take these patches? Tony? >I don't really have a problem with the patch (except for it should be >selectable, even if that's just a CONFIG_ setting). At the same time, >the performance results don't really make sense; so if there's actually >an underlying problem, I'd rather that get addressed (and the long >interrupt latency may be the underlying problem). Your questions got me thinking a bit more. I concluded that it's hard to define why this difference in performance is so big. I only got to it by just trying and seeing what would happen. >As far as the 8250 driver and threaded irqs go, I just was hoping for >another data point with a simple hard-coded test jig, not a full-blown >patch series for all of them. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Ah yes. I'll see what I can do about it. It does make sense to get that data point somehow. Thanks, Frans > >Regards, >Peter Hurley > >_______________________________________________ >linux-arm-kernel mailing list >linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org >http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler 2014-09-23 18:11 ` Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-23 18:38 ` Tony Lindgren 2014-09-23 20:02 ` Frans Klaver 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Tony Lindgren @ 2014-09-23 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frans Klaver Cc: Peter Hurley, Frans Klaver, Mark Rutland, devicetree, Pawel Moll, Ian Campbell, Alexey Pelykh, Kumar Gala, linux-kernel, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, linux-serial, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-omap, Jiri Slaby, linux-arm-kernel * Frans Klaver <fransklaver@gmail.com> [140923 11:12]: > On 23 September 2014 19:17:20 CEST, Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com> wrote: > > > >I would've thought the first 2 patches had already been picked up > >because > >they fix div-by-zero faults. > > I've had no confirmation of that happening so far. I also don't > know if I should expect one. Who'd take these patches? Tony? $ scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c Shows they should be sent to Greg and linux-serial. Please also Cc linux-omap. And if it's a fix, please make sure the subject has the magic word fix :) Regards, Tony ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler 2014-09-23 18:38 ` Tony Lindgren @ 2014-09-23 20:02 ` Frans Klaver 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-23 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Peter Hurley, Frans Klaver, Mark Rutland, devicetree, Pawel Moll, Ian Campbell, Alexey Pelykh, Kumar Gala, linux-kernel, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, linux-serial, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-omap, Jiri Slaby, linux-arm-kernel On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: > * Frans Klaver <fransklaver@gmail.com> [140923 11:12]: >> On 23 September 2014 19:17:20 CEST, Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com> wrote: >> > >> >I would've thought the first 2 patches had already been picked up >> >because >> >they fix div-by-zero faults. >> >> I've had no confirmation of that happening so far. I also don't >> know if I should expect one. Who'd take these patches? Tony? > > $ scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > > Shows they should be sent to Greg and linux-serial. Please also Cc > linux-omap. And if it's a fix, please make sure the subject has the > magic word fix :) Done. Thanks. Frans ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 4/4] tty: omap-serial: support setting of hardware flow control in dts 2014-09-15 14:00 [PATCH v3 0/4] omap-serial high-speed fixes/improvements Frans Klaver ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 ` Frans Klaver 3 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Frans Klaver @ 2014-09-15 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Frans Klaver, Felipe Balbi, Rob Herring, Pawel Moll, Mark Rutland, Ian Campbell, Kumar Gala, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Alexey Pelykh, Jiri Slaby, linux-serial, linux-omap, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel This makes hardware flow control availability configurable from the device tree. Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <frans.klaver@xsens.com> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/omap_serial.txt | 1 + drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/omap_serial.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/omap_serial.txt index 342eedd..1b629e9 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/omap_serial.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/omap_serial.txt @@ -8,3 +8,4 @@ Required properties: Optional properties: - clock-frequency : frequency of the clock input to the UART +- has-hw-flow-control : the hardware has flow control capability diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c index 398139a..bff6874 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c @@ -1597,6 +1597,10 @@ static struct omap_uart_port_info *of_get_uart_port_info(struct device *dev) of_property_read_u32(dev->of_node, "clock-frequency", &omap_up_info->uartclk); + + if (of_property_read_bool(dev->of_node, "has-hw-flow-control")) + omap_up_info->flags |= UPF_HARD_FLOW; + return omap_up_info; } -- 2.1.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-09-23 20:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-09-15 14:00 [PATCH v3 0/4] omap-serial high-speed fixes/improvements Frans Klaver
2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 1/4] tty: omap-serial: pull out calculation from baud_is_mode16 Frans Klaver
2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 2/4] tty: omap-serial: prevent division by zero Frans Klaver
2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 3/4] tty: omap-serial: use threaded interrupt handler Frans Klaver
2014-09-15 15:39 ` Peter Hurley
[not found] ` <54170823.7040801-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
2014-09-15 17:31 ` Peter Hurley
2014-09-16 8:50 ` Frans Klaver
2014-09-17 12:01 ` Peter Hurley
2014-09-17 12:13 ` Frans Klaver
2014-09-23 8:24 ` Frans Klaver
[not found] ` <20140923082445.GA16218-fflvphBLEC9V3v/g3MTWbjg1oUeLRpcR@public.gmane.org>
2014-09-23 17:17 ` Peter Hurley
[not found] ` <5421AB20.8040606-WaGBZJeGNqdsbIuE7sb01tBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
2014-09-23 18:11 ` Frans Klaver
2014-09-23 18:38 ` Tony Lindgren
2014-09-23 20:02 ` Frans Klaver
2014-09-15 14:00 ` [PATCH 4/4] tty: omap-serial: support setting of hardware flow control in dts Frans Klaver
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).