Re: [PATCH] allow alternative name for PXA serial console

Sergei Ianovich
2013-11-22T14:46:39Z

On 13 March 2013 04:03, Сергей Янович <ynvich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13 March 2013 03:39, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 03:34:59AM +0400, Сергей Янович wrote:
>>> --------------------
>>> * Non-8250 serial port support
>>> *
>>> PXA serial port support (SERIAL_PXA) [Y/n/?] y
>>> Console on PXA serial port (SERIAL_PXA_CONSOLE) [Y/n/?] y
>>> as /dev/ttySA[0-3] (SERIAL_PXA_TTYSA_NAME) [N/y/?] (NEW)
>>
>> Please make it sane for the single line it is on.
>
> "PXA serial port with SA-1100 major"
> "PXA serial port with SA-1100 major number"
> "PXA serial port with SA-1100 major device number"
>
> Could anything like that be acceptable?
>
> How long a line could be?
>
>>> Maybe I am missing something obvious, but it seems that such a
>>> collision is a kernel bug. Someone assumed that PXA cannot have a 8250
>>> tty device and used 8250's parameters in PXA tty driver.
>>
>> Yes, someone must have messed up, so care to find the root problem here?
>
> Two drivers try to use the same resource. It was in pre-git era, so it
> difficult to find out exactly. I would guess that that 8250 have
> precedence by at least 5 years. But it is almost guaranteed that lots
> of people depend on PXA console having ttyS0 name. So simple
> s/ttyS/ttySA/ is not a solution. My patch preserves status quo by
> default, but allows to have a correct workaround for those who face a
> collision. By correct I mean that it will not create a new collision
> since a system cannot run on both SA-1100 and PXA270 at the same time.
> This assumption is already documented in
> arch/arm/mach-pxa/include/mach/irqs.h line 94.

Patch discussion seemed to stall. Could we restart?