Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > Marc St-Jean wrote: > > >> >>This I would hope you can hide in the platform specific > >> >>serial_in/serial_out functions. If you write the UART_LCR save it in > >> >>serial_out(), if you read IER etc. > > >> > I couldn't find hooks for platform specific serial_in/out functions. > > >> It's because there are none. :-) > > >> > Do you mean using the up->port.iotype's in serial_in/out from 8250.c? > > >> Not sure what Alan meant, but this seems the only option for now. > > > That's the conclusion I came to. I've rewritten the patch to use > port.type > > instead of iotype since one of the fix is SoC and not UART specific. > I guess > > I failed to folkow your logic. :-) No longer matters as I can't use port.type. See next comment. > > I could use both iotype and type with a test on each for the appropriate > > bug, what do you recommend? > > I think iotype would be enough. You can't pass type for platform > devices > anyway, IIRC (the thing I don't quite like). I just found that out the hard way, it get's overwritten during autoconfig* and ends up back at PORT_16550A. I'm now trying to use my own iotype = UPIO_DWAPB and I've added it to all cases that check for UPIO_MEM. However at boot time I'm getting: "serial8250: ttyS0 at *unknown* (irq = 27) is a 16550A". It looks like something outside of 8250.c must be checking for UPIO_MEM, I'm looking into it. > > >> >>And we might want to add a void * for board specific insanity to > the 8250 > >> >>structures if we really have to so you can hang your brain damage > >> >>privately off that ? > > >> > Sounds good to me, it would give us a location to store the > address of the > >> > UART_STATUS_REG required by this UART variant. > > >> I doubt we really need to *store* it somewhere. Isn't it an fixed > offset > >>from UART's base (I haven't seen the header)? > > > Unfortunately it's not a constant offset from the UART in the SoC > register > > Hm... > > > space. I've used Alan suggestion and added a classic, on some other > OSes %-|, > > void "user" pointer. > > Only do not do it under #ifdef. Understood, getting rid of them is why I started this thread. Marc
