Subject: Re: [PATCH] SPCR: check bit width for the 16550 UART
To: Duc Dang <dhdang@apm.com>,
        Aleksey Makarov <aleksey.makarov@linaro.org>
References: <20161205130534.11080-1-aleksey.makarov@linaro.org>
 <CADaLND=cpfnrNUAR+hHBjMk=ei50Z=TFhgzDy0T+EkqUuM7ZWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-serial@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
        Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com>,
        Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
From: Jon Masters <jcm@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <c5bc8527-4dbc-8411-a441-7e7aebcbbfed@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 18:27:07 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADaLND=cpfnrNUAR+hHBjMk=ei50Z=TFhgzDy0T+EkqUuM7ZWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1490
Lines: 39

Duc, Aleksey, all,

I have a question about this...

On 12/05/2016 01:51 PM, Duc Dang wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 5:05 AM, Aleksey Makarov
> <aleksey.makarov@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Check the 'Register Bit Width' field of the ACPI Generic Address
>> Structure that specifies the address of the UART registers to
>> decide if the driver should use "mmio32" access instead of "mmio".
>>
>> If the driver is other than 16550 the access with is defined
>> by the Interface Type field of the SPCR table.

I have two questions about this:

1). Why is this not a full 16550 (ACPI_DBG2_16550_COMPATIBLE)?

2). Why is it a ACPI_DBG2_16550_SUBSET you are assuming here?

The SPCR and DBG2 spec clearly state that the _SUBSET is intended
to represent a UART compatible with the earlier DGBP specification,
not that a UART is a "subset" of a full 16550 (which seems to be
the assumption in this patch). It's important we get this right.

I built a test kernel with this patch and updated ACPI tables earlier,
but it didn't boot with a console because I had left it a subtype 0,
but just changed the width to 32 bit, which is what I expected.

Further, I've heard back from Microsoft and they're looking at
adding a specific subtype for this. If they do, I'm inclined to
address existing designs with your patch (but I would favor this
check because against the full 16550) and then switch newer APM
based designs to the new subtype.

Jon.

-- 
Computer Architect | Sent from my Fedora powered laptop