On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 12:34:11AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Robert Nelson <robertcnelson@xxxxxxxxx> [140702 12:27]: > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 11:09:32AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > >> > It has been only tested as console UART. > > >> > The tty name is ttyS based instead of ttyO. How big is the pain here, > > >> > what could be the easiest way to provide compatibility? > > >> > > >> have been considering that myself for months. You could pass an optional > > >> argument to serial8250_register_8250_port() but that only solves part of > > >> the problem :-( > > Some kind of compability layer sure would be nice. > > > > When ttyS -> ttyO change was done on OMAP, compatibility was not an issue. > > > Why should we care about it now? > > > > It would be a good opportunity to force everyone to update their bootloader. ;) > > > > Besides the BeagleBoard forum is quiet now, no one is complaining > > about that old (ttyS -> ttyO) transition anymore.. > > How about a Kconfig option to provide ttyO by default? The not even > do that if kernel has cmdline option nottyomap. what about single zImage ? I don't want to use ttyO on my Allwinner/Exynos/Snapdragon/whatever SoC just because OMAP is in the same image ;-) -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
