Re: [PATCH] Handle reg-shift property for of_serial ports

[David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>]

On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 14:10 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Given the existence of the boards, it looks correct to do this.
> However, I wonder if it was correct for the MV64660 to claim
> compatibily witn ns16550 if the programming model is not exactly
> the same. The official OF serial port bindings don't mention the
> reg-shift property, so it maybe would have been better to have
> a different value for the "compatible" property, in order not
> to confuse existing operating systems that implement the standard. 

Ok, how about 'sparse16550'? Otherwise identical to ns16550, but with
the reg-shift property. I'll send a patch shortly, and I'll reorder the
match table -- if something claims compatibility with both 8250 and
16550, shouldn't we drive it as the latter?

Can we add properties to indicate the common high-speed modes too? The
Natsemi baud-base thing could be autodetected by 8250.c if you'd let it,
but the SMSC trick just has to be set as a UPF_MAGIC_MULTIPLIER flag.

-- 
dwmw2