Re: rts-gpio DT binding
Hi, On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 09:15:03AM +, Mark Jackson wrote: On 18/03/14 17:11, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 05:04:47PM +, Mark Jackson wrote: On 18/03/14 16:55, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi Mark, I'm looking at the omap-serial driver and saw that you added rts-gpio binding in commit 4a0ac0f55b18dc297a87a85417fcf068658bf103 (OMAP: add RS485 support) but, as it turns out, gpio0_13 and gpio2_15 are both actual RTS signals. Instead of adding that extra GPIO handling, why didn't you just mux those signals as RTS and enable auto-RTS/auto-CTS feature ? It looks to me like that's highly unnecessary binding. I agree !! I think it was to allow delays pre- and post- sending the comms data. Several RS485 drivers require a warm up time before they will transmit data correctly, and also need a cool down time to prevent clipping of the last few bits of data. IIRC the built-in RTS handling did not allow for this. you might be right here. I can't find anywhere to write rts delays. Weird... digging TRM. It also allows the RTS signal to be inverted, again required for some RS485 driver chips. However, I'll dig into why I did this and report back. cool, thanks Okay ... it comes back to me now. When using RS485 drivers, we're not actually using RTS as a Ready To Send, we're really using it as an enable RS485 driver. I just used the RTS mnemonic as we're now wanting to send some data so please now enable the RS485 driver, rather than the normal I'm ready for your to send me some data. So it's the opposite function. Maybe it was a poor choice of abbreviation ? As I said before, RS485 drivers might have active or active low enables, so we might need to invert the RTS polarity. This is not handled by the hardware RTS signal. Is that a good enough explanation ? fair, but considering you can toggle RTS by hand with writes to MCR register, I still don't see the need for remuxing the lines as GPIOs. Just don't use auto-RTS and toggle the line by hand with MCR, no ? -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: rts-gpio DT binding
On 19/03/14 14:59, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi, On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 09:15:03AM +, Mark Jackson wrote: [snip] Okay ... it comes back to me now. When using RS485 drivers, we're not actually using RTS as a Ready To Send, we're really using it as an enable RS485 driver. I just used the RTS mnemonic as we're now wanting to send some data so please now enable the RS485 driver, rather than the normal I'm ready for your to send me some data. So it's the opposite function. Maybe it was a poor choice of abbreviation ? As I said before, RS485 drivers might have active or active low enables, so we might need to invert the RTS polarity. This is not handled by the hardware RTS signal. Is that a good enough explanation ? fair, but considering you can toggle RTS by hand with writes to MCR register, I still don't see the need for remuxing the lines as GPIOs. Just don't use auto-RTS and toggle the line by hand with MCR, no ? TBH I hadn't realised you could do that, so I guess you could. But my solution seems more flexible as it would allow you to add an RTS signal to UART0 and UART5 which don't have any hardware handshaking lines. Mark J. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: rts-gpio DT binding
Hi, On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 05:02:56PM +, Mark Jackson wrote: Okay ... it comes back to me now. When using RS485 drivers, we're not actually using RTS as a Ready To Send, we're really using it as an enable RS485 driver. I just used the RTS mnemonic as we're now wanting to send some data so please now enable the RS485 driver, rather than the normal I'm ready for your to send me some data. So it's the opposite function. Maybe it was a poor choice of abbreviation ? As I said before, RS485 drivers might have active or active low enables, so we might need to invert the RTS polarity. This is not handled by the hardware RTS signal. Is that a good enough explanation ? fair, but considering you can toggle RTS by hand with writes to MCR register, I still don't see the need for remuxing the lines as GPIOs. Just don't use auto-RTS and toggle the line by hand with MCR, no ? TBH I hadn't realised you could do that, so I guess you could. But my solution seems more flexible as it would allow you to add an RTS signal to UART0 and UART5 which don't have any hardware handshaking lines. fair, but at least turn into helper functions part of serial core so that other serial drivers have a chance of reusing this. IMHO, it's a pretty ugly hack, but then again, a bunch of current in-kernel GPIO usage is, anyway. -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
rts-gpio DT binding
Hi Mark, I'm looking at the omap-serial driver and saw that you added rts-gpio binding in commit 4a0ac0f55b18dc297a87a85417fcf068658bf103 (OMAP: add RS485 support) but, as it turns out, gpio0_13 and gpio2_15 are both actual RTS signals. Instead of adding that extra GPIO handling, why didn't you just mux those signals as RTS and enable auto-RTS/auto-CTS feature ? It looks to me like that's highly unnecessary binding. -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: rts-gpio DT binding
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 05:04:47PM +, Mark Jackson wrote: On 18/03/14 16:55, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi Mark, I'm looking at the omap-serial driver and saw that you added rts-gpio binding in commit 4a0ac0f55b18dc297a87a85417fcf068658bf103 (OMAP: add RS485 support) but, as it turns out, gpio0_13 and gpio2_15 are both actual RTS signals. Instead of adding that extra GPIO handling, why didn't you just mux those signals as RTS and enable auto-RTS/auto-CTS feature ? It looks to me like that's highly unnecessary binding. I agree !! I think it was to allow delays pre- and post- sending the comms data. Several RS485 drivers require a warm up time before they will transmit data correctly, and also need a cool down time to prevent clipping of the last few bits of data. IIRC the built-in RTS handling did not allow for this. you might be right here. I can't find anywhere to write rts delays. Weird... digging TRM. It also allows the RTS signal to be inverted, again required for some RS485 driver chips. However, I'll dig into why I did this and report back. cool, thanks -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: rts-gpio DT binding
hi, On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:11:10PM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 05:04:47PM +, Mark Jackson wrote: On 18/03/14 16:55, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi Mark, I'm looking at the omap-serial driver and saw that you added rts-gpio binding in commit 4a0ac0f55b18dc297a87a85417fcf068658bf103 (OMAP: add RS485 support) but, as it turns out, gpio0_13 and gpio2_15 are both actual RTS signals. Instead of adding that extra GPIO handling, why didn't you just mux those signals as RTS and enable auto-RTS/auto-CTS feature ? It looks to me like that's highly unnecessary binding. I agree !! I think it was to allow delays pre- and post- sending the comms data. Several RS485 drivers require a warm up time before they will transmit data correctly, and also need a cool down time to prevent clipping of the last few bits of data. IIRC the built-in RTS handling did not allow for this. you might be right here. I can't find anywhere to write rts delays. Weird... digging TRM. hmm, you can change RTS value manually if you don't use auto-RTS. Just write MCR BIT(1) to toggle that line. The warm up time you mention, however, can be coped with by means of RX FIFO trigger level. TRM mentions that far end could send another byte after RTS has been deasserted. So if we set RX trigger level to always have room for one extra byte, then we will never loose data and the warm up time is probably negligible. Am I missing something ? -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: rts-gpio DT binding
Hi, On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:18:41PM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: hi, On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:11:10PM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 05:04:47PM +, Mark Jackson wrote: On 18/03/14 16:55, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi Mark, I'm looking at the omap-serial driver and saw that you added rts-gpio binding in commit 4a0ac0f55b18dc297a87a85417fcf068658bf103 (OMAP: add RS485 support) but, as it turns out, gpio0_13 and gpio2_15 are both actual RTS signals. Instead of adding that extra GPIO handling, why didn't you just mux those signals as RTS and enable auto-RTS/auto-CTS feature ? It looks to me like that's highly unnecessary binding. I agree !! I think it was to allow delays pre- and post- sending the comms data. Several RS485 drivers require a warm up time before they will transmit data correctly, and also need a cool down time to prevent clipping of the last few bits of data. IIRC the built-in RTS handling did not allow for this. you might be right here. I can't find anywhere to write rts delays. Weird... digging TRM. hmm, you can change RTS value manually if you don't use auto-RTS. Just write MCR BIT(1) to toggle that line. The warm up time you mention, however, can be coped with by means of RX FIFO trigger level. TRM mentions that far end could send another byte after RTS has been deasserted. So if we set RX trigger level to always have room for one extra byte, then we will never loose data and the warm up time is probably negligible. Am I missing something ? another small gem hidden in the TRM: You must ensure that TCR[3:0] TCR[7:4], whenever auto-RTS or software flow control is enabled to avoid a misoperation of the device. In FIFO interrupt mode with flow control, you have to also ensure that the trigger level to HALT transmission is greater or equal to receive FIFO trigger level (either TLR[7:4] or FCR[7:6]); otherwise, FIFO operation stalls. so there are quite a few things needed to get this working properly. -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: rts-gpio DT binding
On 18/03/14 16:55, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi Mark, I'm looking at the omap-serial driver and saw that you added rts-gpio binding in commit 4a0ac0f55b18dc297a87a85417fcf068658bf103 (OMAP: add RS485 support) but, as it turns out, gpio0_13 and gpio2_15 are both actual RTS signals. Instead of adding that extra GPIO handling, why didn't you just mux those signals as RTS and enable auto-RTS/auto-CTS feature ? It looks to me like that's highly unnecessary binding. I agree !! I think it was to allow delays pre- and post- sending the comms data. Several RS485 drivers require a warm up time before they will transmit data correctly, and also need a cool down time to prevent clipping of the last few bits of data. IIRC the built-in RTS handling did not allow for this. It also allows the RTS signal to be inverted, again required for some RS485 driver chips. However, I'll dig into why I did this and report back. Mark J. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
