* base baud reporting strange on efm32 @ 2013-10-07 7:03 Uwe Kleine-König 2013-10-07 7:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2013-10-07 7:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kees Cook, Greg Kroah-Hartman; +Cc: linux-serial, kernel Hello Kees, hello Greg, since commit 7d12b97 (serial: report base_baud after initialization) my efm32 machine says during startup: 4000e400.uart: ttyefm4 at MMIO 0x4000e400 (irq = 25, base_baud = 0) is a efm32-uart Is this "= 0" expected or is there something wrong in the driver? (Sorry for not replying to the patch, but I didn't find it neither on lkml nor on linux-serial.) Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: base baud reporting strange on efm32 2013-10-07 7:03 base baud reporting strange on efm32 Uwe Kleine-König @ 2013-10-07 7:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2013-10-07 7:28 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Greg Kroah-Hartman @ 2013-10-07 7:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Uwe Kleine-König; +Cc: Kees Cook, linux-serial, kernel On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:03:06AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > Hello Kees, hello Greg, > > since commit > 7d12b97 (serial: report base_baud after initialization) > my efm32 machine says during startup: > 4000e400.uart: ttyefm4 at MMIO 0x4000e400 (irq = 25, base_baud = 0) is a efm32-uart > > Is this "= 0" expected or is there something wrong in the driver? Does the hardware work properly? That's the best test of this, right? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: base baud reporting strange on efm32 2013-10-07 7:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman @ 2013-10-07 7:28 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2013-10-07 20:46 ` Kees Cook 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2013-10-07 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg Kroah-Hartman; +Cc: Kees Cook, linux-serial, kernel On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 12:21:49AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:03:06AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > Hello Kees, hello Greg, > > > > since commit > > 7d12b97 (serial: report base_baud after initialization) > > my efm32 machine says during startup: > > 4000e400.uart: ttyefm4 at MMIO 0x4000e400 (irq = 25, base_baud = 0) is a efm32-uart > > > > Is this "= 0" expected or is there something wrong in the driver? > > Does the hardware work properly? That's the best test of this, right? Yes, it works fine. Still I wonder if there is a problem that the driver doesn't fill in port.uartclk early enough. In the efm32-uart driver (i.e. drivers/tty/serial/efm32-uart.c) this member is only assigned to in .startup. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: base baud reporting strange on efm32 2013-10-07 7:28 ` Uwe Kleine-König @ 2013-10-07 20:46 ` Kees Cook 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Kees Cook @ 2013-10-07 20:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Uwe Kleine-König; +Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-serial, kernel On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 12:21:49AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:03:06AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: >> > Hello Kees, hello Greg, >> > >> > since commit >> > 7d12b97 (serial: report base_baud after initialization) >> > my efm32 machine says during startup: >> > 4000e400.uart: ttyefm4 at MMIO 0x4000e400 (irq = 25, base_baud = 0) is a efm32-uart >> > >> > Is this "= 0" expected or is there something wrong in the driver? >> >> Does the hardware work properly? That's the best test of this, right? > Yes, it works fine. Still I wonder if there is a problem that the driver > doesn't fill in port.uartclk early enough. In the efm32-uart driver (i.e. > drivers/tty/serial/efm32-uart.c) this member is only assigned to in > .startup. Hm, yeah, it looks like uart_add_one_port() (which ultimately makes the printk call) is called in efm32_uart_probe(), but uartclk gets set during serial open (via efm32_uart_startup()). So, it seems this "0" report is harmless. If the efm32 driver wants to have something meaningful there, I guess the clk code needs to move around. -Kees -- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-10-07 20:46 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-10-07 7:03 base baud reporting strange on efm32 Uwe Kleine-König 2013-10-07 7:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2013-10-07 7:28 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2013-10-07 20:46 ` Kees Cook
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).