From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kefeng Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] serial: 8250_dw: fix wrong logic in dw8250_check_lcr() Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 16:33:34 +0800 Message-ID: <57061B5E.7040707@huawei.com> References: <1459827166-13861-1-git-send-email-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> <1459835585-25751-1-git-send-email-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> <1459853407.12843.7.camel@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1459853407.12843.7.camel@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Shevchenko , Noam Camus , Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Heikki Krogerus , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, guohanjun@huawei.com, xuwei5@hisilicon.com List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org On 2016/4/5 18:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 13:53 +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: >> Commit cdcea058e510 ("serial: 8250_dw: Avoid serial_outx code >> duplicate >> with new dw8250_check_lcr()") introduce a wrong logic when write val >> to >> LCR reg. When CONFIG_64BIT enabled, __raw_writeq is used >> unconditionally. >> >> The __raw_readq/__raw_writeq is introduced by commit bca2092d7897 >> ("serial: >> 8250_dw: Use 64-bit access for OCTEON.") for OCTEON, so for >> !PORT_OCTEON, >> we better to use coincident write func. >> >> Fixes: cdcea058e510("serial: 8250_dw: Avoid serial_outx code >> duplicate with new dw8250_check_lcr()") >> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang >> --- >> >> Changes since v3: >> - Add patch change log, suggested by Greg Kroah-Hartman. >> Changes since v2: >> - Add #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT back, ensure it can be built under > > Oh, true. Since it's a native IO we can't use writeq() helper from io- > 64-nonatomic-*. > >> configuration lacking readq/writeq. >> Changes since v1: >> - Repace '#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT' with IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_64BIT). >> - Enrich patch log, and add Fixes tag. [...] > > So, this changes logic to write the value on any 64 platform, using > different (non-64-bit) accessors, so, the case to fix is > actually "64BIT && !PORT_OCTEON". Perhaps commit message should be > amended to point that clearly. Yes, it's more clear. thanks for review and point it out. To Greg, should I resend it or can you help me to change the patch log when you merge it. Thanks.