From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: 8250: handle USR for DesignWare 8250 with correct accessors Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 14:57:24 +0100 Message-ID: <20110610145724.1e0c0983@bob.linux.org.uk> References: <1307616525-22028-1-git-send-email-jamie@jamieiles.com> <20110610035817.GA6740@linux-mips.org> <20110610075426.GM3711@pulham.picochip.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:34376 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932238Ab1FJN71 (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 09:59:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110610075426.GM3711@pulham.picochip.com> Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org To: Jamie Iles Cc: Ralf Baechle , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Marc St-Jean , Shane McDonald , Anoop P A > I found this series from Alan > (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-serial/msg03484.html) which looks > like it would do the job if we added the extra irq callback. Ideally > we just remove both of the UPIO_DWAPB and UPIO_DWAPB32 and let the > platform specify the ops. I've not yet had time to go back and revisit those patches and debug them so they actually work but as and when someone gets time I think it's the right basic path to follow, and the irq callback looks sensible too. Ultimately yes I'd also like to see all board specific ops banished from 8250.c