On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 01:37:53PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > I still think that's a bad idea. ZTE is not the first one making such > small customization on PL011, and likely won't be the last one. We > don't want to clone PL011 driver every time there is a such vendor > hardware coming out, do we? Having PL011 driver being able to handle > different register layout is very helpful to handle such vendor > variants, IMHO. Well, it's turning out that handling ZTE in PL011 is turning into a bad idea as well - we keep getting these breakages each time we try. I think ZTE is sufficiently different from PL011 with the different register layout _and_ the different bits, _and_ the pain that this is causing, that it should have been a separate driver. The only way I can think of dealing with the console issue is to replicate the console code, once for the PL011 variant and then again for the ZTE variant. We can't _both_ give them the same names _and_ register them together - we either have to give them different names, which makes it confusing because one name won't match the userspace name for the UART, or we need the driver to detect the port type early. That's made much more difficult because ZTE didn't bother with the ID registers, unlike every other vendor. Serial drivers are not that complex anymore, compared to how they were back before serial_core happened, so having it as a separate driver isn't that big a deal. -- RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- 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
