From: Detlev Zundel <dzu@denx.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] include/ns16550.h: Unify structure declaration for registers
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:08:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2k552cjym.fsf@ohwell.denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49F99F2A.1070603@ge.com> (Jerry Van Baren's message of "Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:52:58 -0400")
Hi Jerry,
> 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.
Isn't this "natural" for a 64-bitter?
>> 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.
Why 4 bytes? 3 + 1 + 12 = 16 as stated.
>>> or this also might work,
>>>
>>> struct NS16550 {
>>> unsigned long rbr;
>>> unsigned long pre_padrbr[3];
>>> : ^^^^
>>> :
>>> };
>
> Again, a stride of 4 bytes, *not* 16.
4 * sizeof(unsigned long) = 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).
It's a 16-byte stride, although the register shows up neither at the
top, nor at the low end, but "slightly to the left", i.e. at offset 0x3
;)
> 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.
That's what my previous hack offered - REG_TYPE for the actual "size" of
accesses and REG_SIZE for the stride. Now that you mention it, one
should probably use REG_TYPE and REG_STRIDE...
Cheers
Detlev
--
Cyberwar is certainly not a myth. But you haven't seen it yet, despite
the attacks on Estonia. Cyberwar is warfare in cyberspace. And warfare
involves massive death and destruction. When you see it, you'll know it.
-- Bruce Schneier, Nov. 2007
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: dzu at denx.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-30 14:08 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
2009-04-30 14:08 ` Detlev Zundel [this message]
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=m2k552cjym.fsf@ohwell.denx.de \
--to=dzu@denx.de \
--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