On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 03:35:21PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 11:35:20AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 04:47:02PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > > > > > [PATCH] Allow ns16550.c to get base baud from rs_table instead of > > > BAUD_BASE > > > > > > REPOST: fixed formating problems in original patch > > > > > > Modifies serial_init to get base baud rate from the rs_table entry instead > > > of BAUD_BASE. Will default back to BAUD_BASE if base_baud is not set. > > > > > > This patch eliminates duplication between the SERIAL_PORT_DFNS macro and > > > BAUD_BASE. Without the patch, if a port set the baud rate in > > > SERIAL_PORT_DFNS, but did not update BASE_BAUD, the BASE_BAUD value > > > would still be used. > > > > > > Rather; serial_init() should look first in SERIAL_PORT_DFNS and use > > > BASE_BAUD as a backup. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely at gdcanada.com> > > > > With everything in-tree, this is fine as baud_base is always set to > > BASE_BAUD, but I'm wondering why this was done. Did you do a port and > > not follow on this? It looks like today you could get away without > > defining BASE_BAUD correctly (8250_early uses and needs this to be > > correct, but I don't think this is frequently used, yet). But I'm not > > sure what we gain here. Thanks. > I stumbled across this while working on moving v2pro to the platform > bus. (I'm also trying to isolate xparameter.h as much as possible to > avoid recompiling the world everytime I get a new bitstream). I've got > the base baud for each port in the rs_table.
I'll buy that, and slightly modify this for 2.6.14, thanks. > IMHO it doesn't seem right to have part of the serial parameters pulled > from rs_table and the base baud pulled from elseware. ie. it looked > like a latent bug to me, so I wrote the patch. I've also got the > impression that the serial subsystem is trying to move away from > depending on BASE_BAUD The general problem here (Holy crap! arch/ppc/boot/common/ns16550.c uses everything we'd like to kill from <asm*/serial.h>) is come up before, and is being slowly fixed. -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
