On Fri, 17 Feb 2023, Biju Das wrote:
> Hi Ilpo,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] serial: 8250_em: Use pseudo offset for UART_FCR
> >
> > On Fri, 17 Feb 2023, Biju Das wrote:
> >
> > > UART_FCR shares the same offset with UART_IIR. We cannot use UART_FCR
> > > in serial8250_em_serial_in() as it overlaps with UART_IIR.
> > >
> > > This patch introduces a macro UART_FCR_EM with a high value to avoid
> > > overlapping with existing UART_* register defines.
> > >
> > > This will help us to use UART_FCR_EM consistently in serial8250_em_
> > > serial{_in/_out} function to read/write FCR register.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Suggested-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > v4:
> > > * New patch. Used UART_FCR_EM for read/write of FCR register.
> > > ---
> > > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_em.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_em.c
> > > b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_em.c
> > > index 499d7a8847ec..4165fd3bb17a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_em.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_em.c
> > > @@ -19,6 +19,13 @@
> > > #define UART_DLL_EM 9
> > > #define UART_DLM_EM 10
> > >
> > > +/*
> > > + * A high value for UART_FCR_EM avoids overlapping with existing
> > > +UART_*
> > > + * register defines. UART_FCR_EM_HW is the real HW register offset.
> > > + */
> > > +#define UART_FCR_EM 0x10003
> > > +#define UART_FCR_EM_HW 3
> > > +
> > > struct serial8250_em_priv {
> > > int line;
> > > };
> > > @@ -29,12 +36,14 @@ static void serial8250_em_serial_out(struct uart_port
> > *p, int offset, int value)
> > > case UART_TX: /* TX @ 0x00 */
> > > writeb(value, p->membase);
> > > break;
> > > - case UART_FCR: /* FCR @ 0x0c (+1) */
> >
> > 8250_port wants this to remain in place, I think. Otherwise it's attempts to
> > set UART_FCR will end up into wrong destination.
>
> Oops, next patch has this change.
>
> + case UART_FCR:
> + serial8250_em_reg_update(p, UART_FCR_EM, value);
>
> I just need to keep UART_FCR for this patch and
> remove it from "serial8250_em_serial_out_helper" on the next patch
IMHO, the extra layer + _helper seems pretty unnecessary. I don't see any
useful thing it achieves over just having to serial_out functions.
--
i.
