On Fri, 2018-02-23 at 11:02 +0000, John Garry wrote: > On 23/02/2018 10:30, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-02-23 at 02:42 +0800, John Garry wrote: > > > There is a requirement > > > Where? > > We require it for a development board for our hip06 platform. Okay, and this particular platform uses Synopsys IP? > > > for supporting an 8250-compatible UART with > > > the following profile/features: > > > - platform device > > > - polling mode (i.e. no interrupt support) > > > - ACPI FW > > > > Elaborate this one, please. > > So we need to define our own HID here, and cannot use PNP compatible > CID > (like PNP0501) as we cannot use the 8250 PNP driver. Why not? What are the impediments? > This is related to the Hisi LPC ACPI support, where we would create > an > MFD (i.e. platform device) for the UART. Why you can't do properly in ACPI? > > > - IO port iotype > > > - 16550-compatible > > > > > > For OF, we have 8250_of.c, and for PNP device we have 8250_pnp.c > > > drivers. However there does not seem to any driver satisfying > > > the above requirements. So this RFC is to find opinion on > > > modifying the Synopsys DW 8250_dw.c driver to support these > > > generic features. > > > > Synopsys 8250 is a particular case of platform drivers. It doesn't > > satisfy "8250-compatible UART" requirement. > Right, but I wanted to try to use the generic parts of the driver to > support this UART to save writing yet another driver. It's still odd. Why this one, why not 8250_foo_bar to touch instead? -- 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
