public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerry Van Baren <gerald.vanbaren@ge.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] include/ns16550.h: Unify structure declaration for	registers
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:52:58 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49F99F2A.1070603@ge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m28wlie38v.fsf@ohwell.denx.de>

Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hello Shinya,
> 
>> Detlev Zundel wrote:
>>> As I said, I understand now why there were different data-types involved
>>> although this was kind of non-obvious.  So I take it, you had a working
>>> configuration with REG_SIZE = 4, correct?
>> I might be unclear. I used to use REG_SIZE = -16, as 16550 registers
>> are located at 0, +0x10, +0x20, ..., .

16 byte stride.  That is seriously odd.

> Ah, so you actually maintain an out-of-tree port.  How should I have
> foreseen that I break something that I don't even have the code to?
> 
>> In this case, I don't think REG_SIZE = 4/-4 works.  Let's see:
> 
> No surely not.  My replies were based on the (wrong) assumption that
> your board port was in U-Boot code.
> 
>> What I need is something like this:
>>
>> struct NS16550 {
>>        unsigned char prepad_rbr[3];
>>        unsigned char rbr;
>>        unsigned char postpad_rbr[12];
>>        :
>>        :
>> };

This is showing a stride of 4 bytes, *not* 16.

>> or this also might work,
>>
>> struct NS16550 {
>>        unsigned long rbr;
>>        unsigned long pre_padrbr[3];
>>        :        ^^^^
>>        :
>> };

Again, a stride of 4 bytes, *not* 16.

>> Makes sense?
> 
> Although I can see what you need, I would be lying if I said that this
> makes sense to me.
> 
>>> Can you enlighten me, why exactly the 8-bit accesses do not work on your
>>> hardware?  Is this because of a "too simplistic" address decoding logic?
>>> What endianness is your CPU using?
>> I don't know much about precise hardware logics, but the byte addresses
>> under 16-bytes-border are ignored.  I'm using a big-endian mips machine.
> 
> This does not make much sense to me, sorry.

The "16" of the "16-bytes-border" statement confuses me too.

It sounds like Shinya has some pretty odd (read "broken") hardware that 
is decoding the registers with a 16 byte stride, although his example 
above shows a 4 byte stride (less broken).

I would further deduce his hardware does not support byte write 
operations (I've never seen hardware that didn't support byte reads). 
I've had hardware that did not support byte writes, so s/w needed to 
write a word instead (given Shinya's description, the extra bytes are 
"don't care").  (I've also dealt with flash connections that only 
supported 64 bit writes - PITA!).

My guess is his processor limitations prevent byte writes so he has to 
do 32bit (4byte) writes, but his hardware decoding results in a 16 byte 
stride.  The result is setting REG_SIZE to 4 gives him the r/w access he 
needs (32 bits), but fails the stride.  Setting it to 16 gives him the 
stride he needs, but a 16 byte register is nonsensical and breaks the 
software.  My guess is Shinya needs another customization dial (I'm 
making this up) "REG_STRIDE" = 16 as well as "REG_SIZE" = 4.

[snip]

Best regards,
gvb

  reply	other threads:[~2009-04-30 12:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-04-03 14:45 [U-Boot] [PATCH] include/ns16550.h: Unify structure declaration for registers Detlev Zundel
2009-04-03 14:55 ` Detlev Zundel
2009-04-03 23:24 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-04-25  1:21 ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-04-27 13:41   ` Detlev Zundel
2009-04-27 14:26     ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-04-27 15:36       ` Detlev Zundel
2009-04-27 16:09         ` Detlev Zundel
2009-04-29 18:51         ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-04-29 19:12           ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-04-30 13:30             ` Detlev Zundel
2009-04-30 14:10               ` Detlev Zundel
2009-05-01  0:56               ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-05-01  5:29                 ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-04-30 12:26           ` Detlev Zundel
2009-04-30 12:52             ` Jerry Van Baren [this message]
2009-04-30 14:08               ` Detlev Zundel
2009-04-30 14:38                 ` Detlev Zundel
2009-04-30 17:06                 ` Jerry Van Baren
2009-05-01  2:21               ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-05-01  1:59             ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-05-04 15:40               ` Detlev Zundel
2009-05-04 21:21                 ` Scott Wood
2009-05-04 21:57                 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-05-05  1:36                   ` Shinya Kuribayashi
2009-05-05  9:09                     ` Detlev Zundel

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=49F99F2A.1070603@ge.com \
    --to=gerald.vanbaren@ge.com \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /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