2009-09-01 14:10:24

by Govindraj

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH]: Adding support for omap-serail driver

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Alan Cox<[email protected]> wrote:
>> +#define UART_BASE(uart_no) ? ? ? ? ? (uart_no == UART1) ? OMAP_UART1_BASE :\
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? (uart_no == UART2) ? OMAP_UART2_BASE :\
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?OMAP_UART3_BASE
>
> Would be cleaner if this was simply an array (and probably faster)
>
>> +
>> +#define UART_MODULE_BASE(uart_no) ? ?(UART1 == uart_no ? \
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? IO_ADDRESS(OMAP_UART1_BASE) :\
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? (UART2 == uart_no ? \
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? IO_ADDRESS(OMAP_UART2_BASE) :\
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? IO_ADDRESS(OMAP_UART3_BASE)))
>
> Ditto
>
>> +extern unsigned int fcr[MAX_UARTS];
>> +extern char *saved_command_line;
>
> We really don't wang globals floating around with names like fcr - and
> why is saved command line needed when we have module option parsing
> functions ?
>
>
>> +unsigned int fcr[MAX_UARTS];
>> +unsigned long up_activity;
>
> Not acceptable as global names - too big a risk of clashes
>
>
>
>> +static int serial_omap_startup(struct uart_port *port)
>> +{
>> + ? ? struct uart_omap_port *up = (struct uart_omap_port *)port;
>> + ? ? unsigned long flags;
>> + ? ? int irq_flags = 0;
>> + ? ? int retval;
>> +
>> + ? ? /* Zoom2 has GPIO_102 connected to Serial device:
>> + ? ? ?* Active High
>> + ? ? ?*/
>> + ? ? if (up->port.flags & UPF_IOREMAP)
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH;
>
> Don't hijack flags here - especially as a patch is pending that adds a
> separate field for IRQ flags to clean that up properly. Build on top of
> that fix instead


Can you provide me the link to that patch.

-----
Regards,
Govindraj.R