linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] AMD Alchemy: claim UART memory range

To: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] AMD Alchemy: claim UART memory range
From: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis@embeddedalley.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 20:38:55 +0300
Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>, Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
In-reply-to: <44FC625A.5050005@ru.mvista.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <4432BF48.8030403@ru.mvista.com> <44F2E9F7.6030309@ru.mvista.com> <F8D0F572-A68C-4343-A563-23D79BAB25AD@embeddedalley.com> <20060830080157.GA17632@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <44FC625A.5050005@ru.mvista.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org

On 04 Σεπ 2006, at 8:28 ΜΜ, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:

Hello.

Russell King wrote:

BTW, can anybody enlighten me why 8250_au1x00.c came into being at all? Its only function seems to register the UART platform devices, the thing that is usually done in the board setup code, i. e. I'd rather have it in arch/mips/au1000/common/platform.c (however, 8250.c should have been able to filter out ports with UPIO_AU in case CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_AU1X00 undefined)...

Seemed like a good idea at the moment to follow the already existing convention.

Already existing convention is as per Sergei's mail actually - to have the platform device registration in arch/*. The others which you thought were convention there (accent, boca, fourport, hub6, mca) are all for add-in
cards and aren't architecture specific.

Hence, they can't live in arch/*.

So yes, 8250_au1x00.c breaks the established convention because it isn't
an add-in card.

   Thanks for clarification.

Now another question to Pantelis: IIUC, the Alchemy UART platform devices have UPF_SKIP_TEST set because of the Alchemy docs claiming that UARTs other than UART3 don't have MCR/MSR and only UART3 does have the full set of the modem control/status lines? Were they indeed failing the loopback test for you? Asking because on DBAu1550 board all (enabled) UARTs do pass the loopback test if I get rid of this flag (however, Au1550 datasheet says MCR/MSR exists on all UARTs, just no modem pins exist on UART0, and only RTS-/CTS- pair on UART1 -- and the bits having no correspoding pins seem to be tied high internally). If I'm correct, the driver seems inconsistent in how it handles UART_BUG_NOMSR flag, only checking it when deciding whether to enable the modem status interrupts or not while actually it should have been checked in serial8250_set_mctrl() and check_modem_status () as well... It also looks like the driver doesn't use Alchemy UARTs to their full potential currently: UART3 has not only full set of modem lines, but also is capable of the auto flow control (UART1 on Au1550 also is). (Making use of these features howewer are complicated by the auto flow control being only available in the late steppings of Au1500 and UART3 modem pins being multiplexed with GPIO...)

WBR, Sergei

PS: CCing linux-mips to keep people here informed. :-)

Hi Sergei,

Yes, 1550 has proper UARTs on all port, but not 1200 ;)

Somehow I thought that hacking 8250 to support two different Au's (1550 & 1200) wouldn't go down well; so I chickened out & settled for a subset that would work on both. Feel free to fight your way through to support all the functionality you
require.

Pantelis


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>