From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bin Meng Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 09:43:43 +0800 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] serial: Introduce linflex uart support In-Reply-To: References: <1459642206-20101-1-git-send-email-eddy.petrisor@gmail.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Eddy Petri?or wrote: > (- Eric, he left the company a little after he contributed to the linflex > driver, so he's email is no longer valid) > > Pe 4 apr. 2016 6:22 a.m., "Bin Meng" a scris: >> >> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Eddy Petri?or >> wrote: >> > From: Stoica Cosmin-Stefan >> > >> > The Linflex module is integrated on some NXP automotive SoCs part of the >> > former >> > Freescale portfolio, like S32V234, an > [..] > >> > +static void linflex_serial_putc(const char c) >> > +{ >> > + if (c == '\n') >> > + serial_putc('\r'); >> >> Please remove this \n \r handling. > > I will and retest, but without it we saw in the past the console not > behaving correctly. > With driver model, this is no longer needed. For legacy drivers, yes, it's needed. > [..] > >> > -- >> >> You should really start creating DM serial driver. Non-DM serial >> driver is not going to be accepted. > > I see. Does that imply also SPL support? Our current vendor branch has no > SPL support and we had no real need for it. On the other hand it is entirely > possible I am misunderstanding what/if the SPL would benefit us. > No need to do SPL support if your board does not need SPL. Regards, Bin