Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 17:31:51 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
Cc: alan@linux.intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kevin.wells@nxp.com, srinivas.bakki@nxp.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, arnd@arndb.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial/of-serial: Add 16654 chip to compatible string
	list
Message-ID: <20120528163151.GB28290@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1338199134-23885-1-git-send-email-stigge@antcom.de> <20120528100338.GI24149@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FC35F97.2030400@antcom.de> <20120528150311.GA28290@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FC3A768.3060208@antcom.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4FC3A768.3060208@antcom.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1711
Lines: 37

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 06:27:20PM +0200, Roland Stigge wrote:
> On 28/05/12 17:03, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >> Initially, with my RFC patch, there was an #ifdef for bigger FIFO in
> >> case of LPC32xx where we have a 16550A variant with 64 byte fifos.
> > 
> > What are all the differences?  Is it just a larger FIFO?
> 
> Yes, this is how it's summarized in the manual (LPC32xx SoC).
> 
> >> So maybe 16750 is the better choice for me, anyway. Already supported in
> >> of-serial. Works for now, but need more testing. Another hint is that
> >> 16750 is advertised as "IP core for Soc" which matches the case of LPC32xx.
> > 
> > 16750 also has automatic hardware flow control support, selectable through
> > bit 5 in the MCR register.  If your UART has that, then it's probably a
> > 16750 derivative rather than a 16550 or 16650 derivative.
> > 
> > 16650s have an EFR register at offset 2, selectable by writing 0xBF into
> > the LCR register, which the 16750 doesn't have.  16650 also has automatic
> > hardware flow control, bit this is selected through a couple of bits in
> > the EFR.
> 
> The 4 LPC32xx's "Standard" UARTs have neither of those.
> 
> Is it ok to use "ns16650", i.e. PORT_16650, or do I need to introduce a
> FIFO depth configuration?

I think you need a new type, because as I said above, 16650s have that
additional EFR, and we will attempt to access that register which
isn't present in yours.

It's not solely about fifo depth.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/