| Message ID | 1385879185-22455-2-git-send-email-ynvich@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi, On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 10:26:14AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > PXA serial ports have "standard" UART names (ttyS[0-3]), major > device number (4) and first minor device number (64) by default. > > If the system has extra 8250 serial port hardware in addition > to onboard PXA serial ports, default settings produce a device > allocation conflict. > > The patch provides a configuration option which can move onboard > ports out of the way of 8250_core by assigning a different (204) > major number and corresponding device names (ttySA[0-3]). > > Signed-off-by: Sergei Ianovich <ynvich@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++---- > 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c b/drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c <snip> > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c > @@ -593,6 +593,20 @@ serial_pxa_type(struct uart_port *port) > static struct uart_pxa_port *serial_pxa_ports[4]; > static struct uart_driver serial_pxa_reg; > > +#ifndef CONFIG_SERIAL_PXA_AS_TTYSA > + > +#define PXA_TTY_NAME "ttyS" > +#define PXA_TTY_MAJOR TTY_MAJOR > +#define PXA_TTY_MINOR 64 > + > +#else > + > +#define PXA_TTY_NAME "ttySA" > +#define PXA_TTY_MAJOR 204 > +#define PXA_TTY_MINOR 5 > + > +#endif > + > #ifdef CONFIG_SERIAL_PXA_CONSOLE > > #define BOTH_EMPTY (UART_LSR_TEMT | UART_LSR_THRE) > @@ -751,7 +765,7 @@ serial_pxa_console_setup(struct console *co, char *options) > } > > static struct console serial_pxa_console = { > - .name = "ttyS", > + .name = PXA_TTY_NAME, > .write = serial_pxa_console_write, > .device = uart_console_device, > .setup = serial_pxa_console_setup, > @@ -792,9 +806,9 @@ static struct uart_ops serial_pxa_pops = { > static struct uart_driver serial_pxa_reg = { > .owner = THIS_MODULE, > .driver_name = "PXA serial", > - .dev_name = "ttyS", > - .major = TTY_MAJOR, > - .minor = 64, > + .dev_name = PXA_TTY_NAME, > + .major = PXA_TTY_MAJOR, > + .minor = PXA_TTY_MINOR, > .nr = 4, > .cons = PXA_CONSOLE, > }; If drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c was converted to an other probe driver for the 8250, this would not be an issue. Br,
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:02 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 10:26:14AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > PXA serial ports have "standard" UART names (ttyS[0-3]), major > > device number (4) and first minor device number (64) by default. > > > > If the system has extra 8250 serial port hardware in addition > > to onboard PXA serial ports, default settings produce a device > > allocation conflict. > > > > The patch provides a configuration option which can move onboard > > ports out of the way of 8250_core by assigning a different (204) > > major number and corresponding device names (ttySA[0-3]). > > > <snip> > > If drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c was converted to an other probe driver for > the 8250, this would not be an issue. It seems that my patch is not going to be accepted. However, there is a device which has both PXA ports and a additional 8250 accent chip. As a result, there is a device allocation conflict. For the device to be usable the conflict needs to be resolved. Do you mean that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten to support lp8x4x special case?
Hi, On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:23:58PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:02 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 10:26:14AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > > PXA serial ports have "standard" UART names (ttyS[0-3]), major > > > device number (4) and first minor device number (64) by default. > > > > > > If the system has extra 8250 serial port hardware in addition > > > to onboard PXA serial ports, default settings produce a device > > > allocation conflict. > > > > > > The patch provides a configuration option which can move onboard > > > ports out of the way of 8250_core by assigning a different (204) > > > major number and corresponding device names (ttySA[0-3]). > > > > > <snip> > > > > If drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c was converted to an other probe driver for > > the 8250, this would not be an issue. > > It seems that my patch is not going to be accepted. However, there is a > device which has both PXA ports and a additional 8250 accent chip. As a > result, there is a device allocation conflict. For the device to be > usable the conflict needs to be resolved. > > Do you mean that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten to > support lp8x4x special case? Sorry I was not clear. I was suggesting that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c would be converted to drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c since it looks to me like just an other 16x50 compatible UART. That would fix the issue with the name conflict. You would then simply register 8250 ports from two probe drivers (drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c and drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_lp8x4x.c). Depending on the order you register your platform devices (which you decide in your platform code), but let's say the pxa gets registered first and let's say it only has one port. You will then have in your system /dev/ttyS0 for the pxa port and /dev/ttyS[1-4] for the other UART. I hope I was able to explain what I mean this time :) Thanks,
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:49 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:23:58PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:02 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 10:26:14AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > > > PXA serial ports have "standard" UART names (ttyS[0-3]), major > > > > device number (4) and first minor device number (64) by default. > > > > > > > > If the system has extra 8250 serial port hardware in addition > > > > to onboard PXA serial ports, default settings produce a device > > > > allocation conflict. > > > > > > > > The patch provides a configuration option which can move onboard > > > > ports out of the way of 8250_core by assigning a different (204) > > > > major number and corresponding device names (ttySA[0-3]). > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > If drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c was converted to an other probe driver for > > > the 8250, this would not be an issue. > > > > It seems that my patch is not going to be accepted. However, there is a > > device which has both PXA ports and a additional 8250 accent chip. As a > > result, there is a device allocation conflict. For the device to be > > usable the conflict needs to be resolved. > > > > Do you mean that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten to > > support lp8x4x special case? > > Sorry I was not clear. I was suggesting that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c > would be converted to drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c since it > looks to me like just an other 16x50 compatible UART. That would fix > the issue with the name conflict. You would then simply register 8250 > ports from two probe drivers (drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c and > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_lp8x4x.c). > > Depending on the order you register your platform devices (which you > decide in your platform code), but let's say the pxa gets registered > first and let's say it only has one port. You will then have in your > system /dev/ttyS0 for the pxa port and /dev/ttyS[1-4] for the other > UART. > > I hope I was able to explain what I mean this time :) Sorry, I wasn't clear as well. I got it right the first time. You mean pxa.c needs to merged into 8250. This will solve the conflict in question, and do it the right way. However, this will be a *much* bigger patch, and it will affect everyone on pxa. Who makes the decision which way to go?
Hi, On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:26:45PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:49 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:23:58PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:02 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > > > > > > If drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c was converted to an other probe driver for > > > > the 8250, this would not be an issue. > > > > > > It seems that my patch is not going to be accepted. However, there is a > > > device which has both PXA ports and a additional 8250 accent chip. As a > > > result, there is a device allocation conflict. For the device to be > > > usable the conflict needs to be resolved. > > > > > > Do you mean that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten to > > > support lp8x4x special case? > > > > Sorry I was not clear. I was suggesting that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c > > would be converted to drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c since it > > looks to me like just an other 16x50 compatible UART. That would fix > > the issue with the name conflict. You would then simply register 8250 > > ports from two probe drivers (drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c and > > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_lp8x4x.c). > > > > Depending on the order you register your platform devices (which you > > decide in your platform code), but let's say the pxa gets registered > > first and let's say it only has one port. You will then have in your > > system /dev/ttyS0 for the pxa port and /dev/ttyS[1-4] for the other > > UART. > > > > I hope I was able to explain what I mean this time :) > > Sorry, I wasn't clear as well. I got it right the first time. You mean > pxa.c needs to merged into 8250. This will solve the conflict in > question, and do it the right way. However, this will be a *much* bigger > patch, and it will affect everyone on pxa. > > Who makes the decision which way to go? Greg and Russel make this decision. By having the pxa driver simply register 8250 ports would probable reduce the code. Thats about the biggest benefit from it. It would still be something nice to have IMO. Ideally all the 8250/16x50 UARTs should register the ports with 8250_core.c, and not create complete uart driver on their own. Br,
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 04:10:33PM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:26:45PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:49 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:23:58PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:02 +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > > > > > > > > If drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c was converted to an other probe driver for > > > > > the 8250, this would not be an issue. > > > > > > > > It seems that my patch is not going to be accepted. However, there is a > > > > device which has both PXA ports and a additional 8250 accent chip. As a > > > > result, there is a device allocation conflict. For the device to be > > > > usable the conflict needs to be resolved. > > > > > > > > Do you mean that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten to > > > > support lp8x4x special case? > > > > > > Sorry I was not clear. I was suggesting that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c > > > would be converted to drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c since it > > > looks to me like just an other 16x50 compatible UART. That would fix > > > the issue with the name conflict. You would then simply register 8250 > > > ports from two probe drivers (drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_pxa.c and > > > drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_lp8x4x.c). > > > > > > Depending on the order you register your platform devices (which you > > > decide in your platform code), but let's say the pxa gets registered > > > first and let's say it only has one port. You will then have in your > > > system /dev/ttyS0 for the pxa port and /dev/ttyS[1-4] for the other > > > UART. > > > > > > I hope I was able to explain what I mean this time :) > > > > Sorry, I wasn't clear as well. I got it right the first time. You mean > > pxa.c needs to merged into 8250. This will solve the conflict in > > question, and do it the right way. However, this will be a *much* bigger > > patch, and it will affect everyone on pxa. > > > > Who makes the decision which way to go? > > Greg and Russel make this decision. By having the pxa driver simply > register 8250 ports would probable reduce the code. Thats about the > biggest benefit from it. > > It would still be something nice to have IMO. Ideally all the > 8250/16x50 UARTs should register the ports with 8250_core.c, and not > create complete uart driver on their own. I agree, this is the best way to resolve this, having a separate uart driver isn't that good at all to be doing, if at all possible. thanks, greg k-h
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 20:12 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 04:10:33PM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:26:45PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > > Who makes the decision which way to go? > > > > Greg and Russel make this decision. By having the pxa driver simply > > register 8250 ports would probable reduce the code. Thats about the > > biggest benefit from it. > > > > It would still be something nice to have IMO. Ideally all the > > 8250/16x50 UARTs should register the ports with 8250_core.c, and not > > create complete uart driver on their own. > > I agree, this is the best way to resolve this, having a separate uart > driver isn't that good at all to be doing, if at all possible. I'm reading the last message as a confirmation that drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten using 8250_core.c. However, "if at all possible" confuses me, since we have pxa.c in the tree and it works. Greg, could you please clarify?
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 08:31:36AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 20:12 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 04:10:33PM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:26:45PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > > > Who makes the decision which way to go? > > > > > > Greg and Russel make this decision. By having the pxa driver simply > > > register 8250 ports would probable reduce the code. Thats about the > > > biggest benefit from it. > > > > > > It would still be something nice to have IMO. Ideally all the > > > 8250/16x50 UARTs should register the ports with 8250_core.c, and not > > > create complete uart driver on their own. > > > > I agree, this is the best way to resolve this, having a separate uart > > driver isn't that good at all to be doing, if at all possible. > > I'm reading the last message as a confirmation that > drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten using 8250_core.c. Yes, how much work is this really? thanks, greg k-h
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 20:35 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 08:31:36AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote: > > I'm reading the last message as a confirmation that > > drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c needs to be rewritten using 8250_core.c. > > Yes, how much work is this really? Great. It seems two drivers practically match. I'll do and submit a merge patch.
Hi! > PXA serial ports have "standard" UART names (ttyS[0-3]), major > device number (4) and first minor device number (64) by default. > > If the system has extra 8250 serial port hardware in addition > to onboard PXA serial ports, default settings produce a device > allocation conflict. > > The patch provides a configuration option which can move onboard > ports out of the way of 8250_core by assigning a different (204) > major number and corresponding device names (ttySA[0-3]). Yes, please. I was hitting the same issue with Sharp Zaurus and bluetooth CF card... Bluetooth card had 8250 inside...
On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 15:14 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Yes, please. I was hitting the same issue with Sharp Zaurus and bluetooth > CF card... Bluetooth card had 8250 inside... A better implementation is posted as v3 of the patch. http://linux-kernel.2935.n7.nabble.com/PATCH-00-11-ARM-support-for-ICP-DAS-LP-8x4x-tp761919p773485.html It would be great if you could test that patch add post back the results.
diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig b/drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig index a3817ab..328b716 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig @@ -419,6 +419,25 @@ config SERIAL_PXA_CONSOLE your boot loader (lilo or loadlin) about how to pass options to the kernel at boot time.) +config SERIAL_PXA_AS_TTYSA + bool "PXA serial ports with SA-1100 name and major number" + depends on SERIAL_PXA + default N + help + PXA serial ports have "standard" UART names (ttyS[0-3]), major + device number (4) and first minor device number (64) by default. + + If the system has extra 8250 serial port hardware in addition + to onboard PXA serial ports, default settings produce a device + allocation conflict. + + Selecting this option will move onboard ports out of the way of + 8250_core by assigning a different (204) major number and + corresponding device names (ttySA[0-3]). + + Say Y here, if you need to support extra 8250 serial port hardware + on a PXA system. + config SERIAL_SA1100 bool "SA1100 serial port support" depends on ARCH_SA1100 diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c b/drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c index f9f20f3..2b5a8ad 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c @@ -593,6 +593,20 @@ serial_pxa_type(struct uart_port *port) static struct uart_pxa_port *serial_pxa_ports[4]; static struct uart_driver serial_pxa_reg; +#ifndef CONFIG_SERIAL_PXA_AS_TTYSA + +#define PXA_TTY_NAME "ttyS" +#define PXA_TTY_MAJOR TTY_MAJOR +#define PXA_TTY_MINOR 64 + +#else + +#define PXA_TTY_NAME "ttySA" +#define PXA_TTY_MAJOR 204 +#define PXA_TTY_MINOR 5 + +#endif + #ifdef CONFIG_SERIAL_PXA_CONSOLE #define BOTH_EMPTY (UART_LSR_TEMT | UART_LSR_THRE) @@ -751,7 +765,7 @@ serial_pxa_console_setup(struct console *co, char *options) } static struct console serial_pxa_console = { - .name = "ttyS", + .name = PXA_TTY_NAME, .write = serial_pxa_console_write, .device = uart_console_device, .setup = serial_pxa_console_setup, @@ -792,9 +806,9 @@ static struct uart_ops serial_pxa_pops = { static struct uart_driver serial_pxa_reg = { .owner = THIS_MODULE, .driver_name = "PXA serial", - .dev_name = "ttyS", - .major = TTY_MAJOR, - .minor = 64, + .dev_name = PXA_TTY_NAME, + .major = PXA_TTY_MAJOR, + .minor = PXA_TTY_MINOR, .nr = 4, .cons = PXA_CONSOLE, };
PXA serial ports have "standard" UART names (ttyS[0-3]), major device number (4) and first minor device number (64) by default. If the system has extra 8250 serial port hardware in addition to onboard PXA serial ports, default settings produce a device allocation conflict. The patch provides a configuration option which can move onboard ports out of the way of 8250_core by assigning a different (204) major number and corresponding device names (ttySA[0-3]). Signed-off-by: Sergei Ianovich <ynvich@gmail.com> --- drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ drivers/tty/serial/pxa.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++---- 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)