On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 11:21 AM Yu Tu <yu.tu@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> @@ -270,14 +284,11 @@ static void meson_uart_reset(struct uart_port *port)
> static int meson_uart_startup(struct uart_port *port)
> {
> u32 val;
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret;
>
> - val = readl(port->membase + AML_UART_CONTROL);
> - val |= AML_UART_CLEAR_ERR;
> - writel(val, port->membase + AML_UART_CONTROL);
> - val &= ~AML_UART_CLEAR_ERR;
> - writel(val, port->membase + AML_UART_CONTROL);
> + meson_uart_reset(port);
I suggest splitting this into a separate patch. In general I think
it's a good idea to re-use meson_uart_reset here if possible.
However, if during testing it turns out that this doesn't work then we
can revert this single patch which updates meson_uart_startup() only -
instead of reverting the whole transition to the common clock
framework.
[...]
> static int meson_uart_request_port(struct uart_port *port)
> {
> + struct meson_uart_data *private_data = port->private_data;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(private_data->pclk);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(private_data->baud_clk);
> + if (ret) {
> + clk_disable_unprepare(private_data->pclk);
> + return ret;
> + }
This code is from my original suggestion - and I had a doubt there
which I forgot to add as a comment originally:
Can you confirm that accessing the UART controller registers works
even when "pclk" is turned off?
I am asking this because the common clock framework can access the
clocks at any time.
And I have seen SoCs which would hang when trying to access a module's
registers while the module's pclk is turned off.
[...]
> port->fifosize = 64;
commit 27d44e05d7b85d ("tty: serial: meson: retrieve port FIFO size
from DT") [0] from May 2021 has changed this line to:
port->fifosize = fifosize;
So your patch currently does not apply to linux-next (or even Linus'
mainline tree).
[...]
> static const struct of_device_id meson_uart_dt_match[] = {
> - { .compatible = "amlogic,meson6-uart" },
> - { .compatible = "amlogic,meson8-uart" },
> - { .compatible = "amlogic,meson8b-uart" },
> - { .compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-uart" },
> + {
> + .compatible = "amlogic,meson6-uart",
> + .data = (void *)false,
> + },
> + {
> + .compatible = "amlogic,meson8-uart",
> + .data = (void *)false,
> + },
> + {
> + .compatible = "amlogic,meson8b-uart",
> + .data = (void *)false,
> + },
> + {
> + .compatible = "amlogic,meson-gxbb-uart",
> + .data = (void *)false,
> + },
> + {
> + .compatible = "amlogic,meson-gxl-uart",
> + .data = (void *)true,
> + },
> + {
> + .compatible = "amlogic,meson-g12a-uart",
> + .data = (void *)true,
> + },
> + {
> + .compatible = "amlogic,meson-s4-uart",
> + .data = (void *)true,
> + },
> + /*
> + * deprecated, don't use anymore because it doesn't differentiate
> + * between GXBB and GXL which have different revisions of the UART IP.
> + */
> + {
> + .compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-uart",
> + .data = (void *)false,
> + },
For this change I think it's also best to split it into separate
changes, similar to the dt-bindings:
1) deprecate and replace "amlogic,meson-gx-uart"
2) another one to add the S4 compatible string
3) and a third one with the big common clock framework change (adding
the .data attributes)
This is about the "Separate each logical change into a separate patch"
rule from the Linux kernel patch submission guide [1]
Also I hope that it will make it (at least a bit) easier for others to
also review this patch.
Best regards,
Martin
[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.c?id=27d44e05d7b85d9d4cfe0a3c0663ea49752ece93
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.17/process/submitting-patches.html#separate-your-changes
