From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Darren Hart Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] pch_uart: Add uart_clk selection for the MinnowBoard Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 20:16:18 -0700 Message-ID: <1372216578.8177.9.camel@envy.home> References: <6cc125b9eb85dd3cae4a2496fdb7f0d17b18f930.1372211451.git.dvhart@linux.intel.com> <20130626023143.GB23320@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:3560 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751518Ab3FZDQT (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 23:16:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130626023143.GB23320@kroah.com> Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "H. Peter Anvin" , peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, danders@circuitco.com, vishal.l.verma@intel.com, Jiri Slaby , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 19:31 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 06:53:22PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > > > struct pch_uart_buffer { > > unsigned char *buf; > > @@ -398,6 +399,10 @@ static int pch_uart_get_uartclk(void) > > strstr(cmp, "nanoETXexpress-TT"))) > > return NTC1_UARTCLK; > > > > + cmp = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_BOARD_NAME); > > + if (cmp && strstr(cmp, "MinnowBoard")) > > + return MINNOW_UARTCLK; > > + > > You know, we do have the DMI interface to handle this in a much nicer > way instead of just randomly trying different strings over and over > until we find one that matches... I was aiming for minimal change. Partly because I'm lazy. Partly because I don't have all of the impacted hardware to test. Partly because I wanted to keep it simple so I could push this to 3.8 stable. I can rewrite this detection to use the DMI interface. Would you allow it as a follow-on, to keep the changes to stable minimal? Also, I do have a PCI subsystem ID for this particular board which I could trigger on, but since that mechanism didn't exist in the driver already and the other boards don't do it, I just followed what was already there (yeah, so I wrote most of what was already there... but.... anyway) :-) What do you prefer? Rewrite, then add Minnow, or use this, then rewrite? -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel