From: Sergei Shtylyov <email@example.com>
To: Thomas Koeller <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: "Russell King" <email@example.com>,
"Yoichi Yuasa" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"Thomas Köller" <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RM9000 serial driver
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 11:24:55 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44F68EC7.firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
Thomas Koeller wrote:
>>iotype is all about the access method used to access the registers of
>>the device, be it by byte or word, and it also takes account of any
>>variance in the addressing of the registers.
>>It does not refer to features or bugs in any particular implementation.
> That's what I assumed, too - it seemed obvious. And it seemed equally
> obvious that it is the port type that encodes the the implementation's
> peculiarities. Among these are the register offset mapping requirements,
> so I assumed these should depend on the port type as well.
Different mapping requirements actually put the device beyond 8250
compatibility, so it seems quite natural they're addressed by the different
RM9000 UART is, strictly speaking, *not* 8250 compatible and needs some
trickery for the 8250 driver to support it (historically, Alchemy UARTs were
driven by the distinct driver, au1x00_uart.c -- however, its code was for the
most part copied over from 8250.c).
> Now Sergei strongly insist that it's the iotype that should be checked
> whenever to get to the hardware type. I still do not quite understand how
> that is supposed to work. If I have a PCI device, for example, then the
> iotype will always be either UPIO_MEM or UPIO_PORT, so how could I learn
> something about the hardware implementation by looking at these values?
I think it's determined by the value of the programming interface register
of the PCI device. The values 0 to 6 imply full backward compatibility to 8250
WRT the addressing scheme, IIUC.
> Or is the assumption that devices on a standard bus will always be of
> a standard type?
For the PCI bus, it is.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-31 7:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-10 21:18 [PATCH] RM9000 serial driver Thomas Koeller
2006-08-11 19:39 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-15 21:15 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-15 21:35 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-21 22:57 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-22 0:59 ` Yoichi Yuasa
2006-08-22 20:27 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-29 15:14 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-29 23:05 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-30 11:59 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-25 22:38 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-26 3:56 ` Jonathan Day
2006-08-29 13:32 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-29 19:04 ` Russell King
2006-08-29 19:37 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-29 19:59 ` Russell King
2006-08-30 21:16 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-29 23:00 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-30 12:12 ` Russell King
2006-08-30 16:50 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2007-02-10 16:11 ` Thomas Koeller
2007-02-10 18:20 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2007-02-12 0:28 ` Thomas Koeller
2007-02-12 0:57 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-30 21:28 ` Thomas Koeller
2006-08-31 7:24 ` Sergei Shtylyov [this message]
2006-08-30 13:22 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-30 14:18 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-30 16:23 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-09-09 17:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2006-08-30 12:15 ` Russell King
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.