On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 01:42:34AM +0800, Yangyu Chen wrote: > > > > On Jun 18, 2024, at 01:14, Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 12:39:30AM +0800, Yangyu Chen wrote: > >> > >> The vendor uses a special intel pxa uart driver, marked deprecated > >> in the kernel and incompatible with ns16550. If we use ns16550 in > >> the dt, the behavior of uart is like the uart has no interrupt and > >> stops working permanently when fifo overruns, making many developers > >> not know how to start unless they use the SBI HVC console, which > >> needs to turn on CONFIG_NONPORTABLE. > > > > This I just do not understand. Why did they use this IP? Is it free? > > Did they use it before for something else? It's a rather strange design > > choice to me. > > I don't know either. However, PXA is a subfamily of XScale. The > kernel also probed the UART as an XScale. So, using XScale compatible > string is OK. Using a fallback to an Xscale compatible is okay, FTFY ;)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
