On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 11:30 +0100, Phil Elwell wrote: > On 27/06/2017 10:15, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 16:15 +0100, Phil Elwell wrote: > > > > > > But this looks like a bug / quirk than a capability? > > > > > > > > It would be better to name this define more self-explaining. > > > > > > > > Btw can't see the definition of UART_CAP_MINI? > > > > > > The capability was added in > > > d087e7a991f1f61ee2c07db1be7c5cc2aa373f5d, > > > which > > > is in linux-next. Given that the "capability" already exists and > > > the > > > quirk > > > is likely to be unique to BCM2835 MINI UART, I don't think we > > > should > > > create > > > a new quirk. > > > > > > Besides, the "HFIFO" capability looks a lot like quirk to me. > > > > To me either, which raises a question "Should it be fixed > > accordingly?" > > If I was going to make these quirks, are we simply talking about > renaming the > capability or is there another mechanism? I've found the 8250_pci > quirks, and > they look quite different. Okay, we have several types of flags in the code 1. Capabilities: UART_CAP: looks like it defines features of hardware solely for 8250 compatible devices. 2. Flags as quirks UPF_<something, not all of them> (I have a patch to convert them to quirks, need by the way to update and resend): they are for any serial devices. 3. Flags as capabilities: UPF_<the rest>, similar function as UART_CAP, but for any serial device. > > I'm also happy to make this code conditional on > CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_BCM2835AUX > if that is more acceptable. No, it is undesired. Can you describe which one from the above suits the best for your case? -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Intel Finland Oy -- 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
