From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
Josh Wu <josh.wu@atmel.com>, Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tty/serial: at91: add a fallback option to determine uart/usart property
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:16:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <525F9CEF.9020904@atmel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131016201451.GA21296@kroah.com>
On 16/10/2013 22:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman :
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:19:18AM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>> On 14/10/2013 15:59, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD :
>>> On 10:43 Thu 10 Oct , Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>>>> On older SoC, the "name" field is not filled in the register map.
>>>> Fix the way to figure out if the serial port is an uart or an usart for these
>>>> older products (with corresponding properties).
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
>>>> include/linux/atmel_serial.h | 1 +
>>>> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
>>>> index 6b0f75e..c7d99af 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
>>>> @@ -99,6 +99,7 @@ static void atmel_stop_rx(struct uart_port *port);
>>>> #define UART_PUT_RTOR(port,v) __raw_writel(v, (port)->membase + ATMEL_US_RTOR)
>>>> #define UART_PUT_TTGR(port, v) __raw_writel(v, (port)->membase + ATMEL_US_TTGR)
>>>> #define UART_GET_IP_NAME(port) __raw_readl((port)->membase + ATMEL_US_NAME)
>>>> +#define UART_GET_IP_VERSION(port) __raw_readl((port)->membase + ATMEL_US_VERSION)
>>>>
>>>> /* PDC registers */
>>>> #define UART_PUT_PTCR(port,v) __raw_writel(v, (port)->membase + ATMEL_PDC_PTCR)
>>>> @@ -1503,6 +1504,7 @@ static void atmel_get_ip_name(struct uart_port *port)
>>>> {
>>>> struct atmel_uart_port *atmel_port = to_atmel_uart_port(port);
>>>> int name = UART_GET_IP_NAME(port);
>>>> + u32 version;
>>>> int usart, uart;
>>>> /* usart and uart ascii */
>>>> usart = 0x55534152;
>>>> @@ -1517,7 +1519,22 @@ static void atmel_get_ip_name(struct uart_port *port)
>>>> dev_dbg(port->dev, "This is uart\n");
>>>> atmel_port->is_usart = false;
>>>> } else {
>>>> - dev_err(port->dev, "Not supported ip name, set to uart\n");
>>>> + /* fallback for older SoCs: use version field */
>>>> + version = UART_GET_IP_VERSION(port);
>>>> + switch (version) {
>>>> + case 0x302:
>>>> + case 0x10213:
>>>> + dev_dbg(port->dev, "This version is usart\n");
>>>> + atmel_port->is_usart = true;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case 0x203:
>>>> + case 0x10202:
>>>> + dev_dbg(port->dev, "This version is uart\n");
>>>> + atmel_port->is_usart = false;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + dev_err(port->dev, "Not supported ip name nor version, set to uart\n");
>>>
>>> it's not really an error a dev_warn is more oppropriate
>>
>> As we are already in -rc5 and that these fixes are critical for at91
>> platforms, I will not re-spin another patch just for this.
>>
>> Moreover, I have the feeling that if we end up in this case, it
>> means that we are in big troubles because the usart/uart included in
>> the product triggering this log is not known (I recall that newer
>> products do not have to hit these lines of code).
>>
>> With these 2 reasons, I prefer to keep my patch like it is.
>>
>> Greg, can you consider taking these two patches as regression fixes
>> for 3.12 (with Tested-by tag from Thomas)?
>
> Is this really a regression from 3.11?
Yes it is. Commit id that I am referring to in patch 1/2
(055560b04a8cd063aea916fd083b7aec02c2adb8) hit the mainline in 3.12-rc
time-frame.
> What's the worry about waiting
> for 3.13-rc1, getting this correct, and then backporting them to the
> 3.12-stable trees?
It will break all older at91 in 3.12-final. Moreover, I do think that
the actual patches are bringing an incorrect solution and I do not plan
to have a better one (which one?) for 3.13...
> I'd prefer that, so, please clean this up properly and resend it, with
> the tested-by: lines and I'll queue them up for 3.13-rc1.
I do not know what to cleanup. Anyway, tell me if you want that I resend
the series of 2 patches with the "Tested-by" tag included.
Bye,
--
Nicolas Ferre
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-17 8:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-10 8:43 [PATCH 1/2] tty/serial: at91: fix uart/usart selection for older products Nicolas Ferre
2013-10-10 8:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] tty/serial: at91: add a fallback option to determine uart/usart property Nicolas Ferre
2013-10-12 15:00 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-10-14 13:59 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2013-10-15 9:19 ` Nicolas Ferre
2013-10-16 20:14 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-10-17 8:16 ` Nicolas Ferre [this message]
2013-10-17 14:13 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-10-17 15:33 ` Nicolas Ferre
2013-10-14 13:58 ` [PATCH 1/2] tty/serial: at91: fix uart/usart selection for older products Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2013-10-15 9:10 ` Nicolas Ferre
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=525F9CEF.9020904@atmel.com \
--to=nicolas.ferre@atmel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=josh.wu@atmel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ludovic.desroches@atmel.com \
--cc=plagnioj@jcrosoft.com \
--cc=voice.shen@atmel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox