On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 04:10:33PM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:26:45PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:49 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:23:58PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:02 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > > > > > > > > If drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c was converted to an other probe driver for > > > > > the 8250, this would not be an issue. > > > > > > > > It seems that my patch is not going to be accepted. However, there is a > > > > device which has both PXA ports and a additional 8250 accent chip. As a > > > > result, there is a device allocation conflict. For the device to be > > > > usable the conflict needs to be resolved. > > > > > > > > Do you mean that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten to > > > > support lp8x4x special case? > > > > > > Sorry I was not clear. I was suggesting that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c > > > would be converted to drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c since it > > > looks to me like just an other 16x50 compatible UART. That would fix > > > the issue with the name conflict. You would then simply register 8250 > > > ports from two probe drivers (drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c and > > > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_lp8x4x.c). > > > > > > Depending on the order you register your platform devices (which you > > > decide in your platform code), but let's say the pxa gets registered > > > first and let's say it only has one port. You will then have in your > > > system /dev/ttyS0 for the pxa port and /dev/ttyS[1-4] for the other > > > UART. > > > > > > I hope I was able to explain what I mean this time :) > > > > Sorry, I wasn't clear as well. I got it right the first time. You mean > > pxa.c needs to merged into 8250. This will solve the conflict in > > question, and do it the right way. However, this will be a *much* bigger > > patch, and it will affect everyone on pxa. > > > > Who makes the decision which way to go? > > Greg and Russel make this decision. By having the pxa driver simply > register 8250 ports would probable reduce the code. Thats about the > biggest benefit from it. > > It would still be something nice to have IMO. Ideally all the > 8250/16x50 UARTs should register the ports with 8250_core.c, and not > create complete uart driver on their own. I agree, this is the best way to resolve this, having a separate uart driver isn't that good at all to be doing, if at all possible. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
