On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 02:34:17PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 20:53 +1100, James Cameron wrote:
> > I don't understand why /dev/ttyS2 (4,66) changed to /dev/ttyS0 (4,64)
> > after the patch was applied to olpc-kernel/arm-3.5 but, as you say it
> > doesn't change, perhaps
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 20:53 +1100, James Cameron wrote:
> I don't understand why /dev/ttyS2 (4,66) changed to /dev/ttyS0 (4,64)
> after the patch was applied to olpc-kernel/arm-3.5 but, as you say it
> doesn't change, perhaps there is something between 3.5 and now for me
> to watch out for. My
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 01:28:51PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 00:17 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
> > I may be able to - one of the downsides though is that many of these
> > systems had hard-coded scripts which started a getty on the original
> > port - and
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 00:17 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> I may be able to - one of the downsides though is that many of these
> systems had hard-coded scripts which started a getty on the original
> port - and that kind of makes it difficult to sort out. This kind of
> change becomes
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 13:42 +1100, James Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> > +/* Uart divisor latch write */
> > +static void serial_pxa_dl_write(struct uart_8250_port *up, int value)
> > +{
> > + serial_out(up, UART_DLL, value & 0xff);
> > +
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 13:42 +1100, James Cameron wrote:
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
+/* Uart divisor latch write */
+static void serial_pxa_dl_write(struct uart_8250_port *up, int value)
+{
+ serial_out(up, UART_DLL, value 0xff);
+
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 00:17 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
I may be able to - one of the downsides though is that many of these
systems had hard-coded scripts which started a getty on the original
port - and that kind of makes it difficult to sort out. This kind of
change becomes
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 01:28:51PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 00:17 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
I may be able to - one of the downsides though is that many of these
systems had hard-coded scripts which started a getty on the original
port - and that
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 20:53 +1100, James Cameron wrote:
I don't understand why /dev/ttyS2 (4,66) changed to /dev/ttyS0 (4,64)
after the patch was applied to olpc-kernel/arm-3.5 but, as you say it
doesn't change, perhaps there is something between 3.5 and now for me
to watch out for. My
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 02:34:17PM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 20:53 +1100, James Cameron wrote:
I don't understand why /dev/ttyS2 (4,66) changed to /dev/ttyS0 (4,64)
after the patch was applied to olpc-kernel/arm-3.5 but, as you say it
doesn't change, perhaps there
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 11:38:51AM +1100, James Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> > pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
> > the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
> > it was impossible to use
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
> the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
> it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
>
> Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
> the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
> it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
>
> Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 04:02:53PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> > pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
> > the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
> > it was impossible to
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
> pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
> the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
> it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
>
> Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned
pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned out to be a clone of
8250_core driver.
Signed-off-by: Sergei Ianovich
CC:
pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned out to be a clone of
8250_core driver.
Signed-off-by: Sergei Ianovich
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned out
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 04:02:53PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
it was impossible to use 8250
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned out
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
it was impossible to use 8250 driver on PXA SoCs.
Upon closer examination pxa2xx-uart turned out
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 11:38:51AM +1100, James Cameron wrote:
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:28:37AM +0400, Sergei Ianovich wrote:
pxa2xx-uart was a separate uart platform driver. It was declaring
the same device names and numbers as 8250 driver. As a result,
it was impossible to use 8250
22 matches
Mail list logo
