lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] serial: 8250: Add support for 8250/16550 as MFD function
    On Tue, 14 May 2019, Esben Haabendal wrote:

    > Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> writes:
    >
    > > On Tue, 07 May 2019, Esben Haabendal wrote:
    > >
    > >> Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> writes:
    > >>
    > >> > On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Esben Haabendal wrote:
    > >> >
    > >> >> The serial8250-mfd driver is for adding 8250/16550 UART ports as functions
    > >> >> to an MFD driver.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> When calling mfd_add_device(), platform_data should be a pointer to a
    > >> >> struct plat_serial8250_port, with proper settings like .flags, .type,
    > >> >> .iotype, .regshift and .uartclk. Memory (or ioport) and IRQ should be
    > >> >> passed as cell resources.
    > >> >
    > >> > What? No, please!
    > >> >
    > >> > If you *must* create a whole driver just to be able to use
    > >> > platform_*() helpers (which I don't think you should), then please
    > >> > call it something else. This doesn't have anything to do with MFD.
    > >>
    > >> True.
    > >>
    > >> I really don't think it is a good idea to create a whole driver just to
    > >> be able to use platform_get_*() helpers. And if I am forced to do this,
    > >> because I am unable to convince Andy to improve the standard serial8250
    > >> driver to support that, it should be called MFD. The driver would be
    > >
    > > I assume you mean "shouldn't"?
    >
    > Of-course.
    >
    > >> generally usable for all usecases where platform_get_*() works.
    > >>
    > >> I don't have any idea what to call such a driver. It really would just
    > >> be a fork of the current serial8250 driver, just allowing use of
    > >> platform_get_*(), supporting exactly the same hardware.
    > >>
    > >> I am still hoping that we can find a way to improve serial8250 to be
    > >> usable in these cases.
    > >
    > > Me too.
    >
    > Unfortunately, I don't seem to be able to convince Andy to accept
    > something like that.

    Andy is not he Maintainer.

    What are Greg and Jiri's opinions?

    > I might have to do this out-of-tree :(

    Well that would suck!

    --
    Lee Jones [李琼斯]
    Linaro Services Technical Lead
    Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
    Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2019-05-14 12:48    [W:6.739 / U:0.144 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site