On Tue, 19 Apr 2022, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 04:39:49PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > > > This reverts UART_CAP_NOTEMT commit and driver changes depending > > on it: > > f6f586102ad1 (serial: 8250: Handle UART without interrupt on TEMT > > using em485) > > 296385fe1275 (serial: 8250: Add UART_CAP_NOTEMT on PORT_16550A_FSL64) > > bec1f1b66a6a (serial: 8250: add compatible for fsl,16550-FIFO64) > > > > The UART_CAP_NOTEMT code added in f6f586102add1 (serial: 8250: > > Handle UART without interrupt on TEMT using em485) containts math > > overflow for 32-bit archs. In addition, the approach used in it > > is unnecessarily complicated requiring a dedicated timer just for > > notemt. A simpler approach for providing UART_CAP_NOTEMT already > > exists (patches 1-2): > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-serial/20220411083321.9131-3-ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u > > Thus, simply revert the UART_CAP_NOTEMT changes for now. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Oh I wasn't aware that Greg picked that up. OK for me to revert. > > I wonder however if it's nice to revert three patches in one commit. I > would have just reverted f6f586102ad1 and kept the define > UART_CAP_NOTEMT such that the other two patches are noops until your > fixed series comes in. Just my 0.02€. I was thinking along the same lines but was a little worried Greg would be against such a solution. ...I'll send v2 with only that single commit reverted. -- i.
