Re: [PATCH] tty: 8250: Add UART_BUG_TXRACE workaround for Aspeed VUART

From: "Andrew Jeffery" <andrew@aj.id.au>
To: "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, "Jiri Slaby" <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
	"Joel Stanley" <joel@jms.id.au>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org, openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org,
	jenmin_yuan@aspeedtech.com,
	"Ryan Chen" <ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com>,
	"Milton Miller II" <miltonm@us.ibm.com>,
	"Chia-Wei, Wang" <chiawei_wang@aspeedtech.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: 8250: Add UART_BUG_TXRACE workaround for Aspeed VUART
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 09:09:04 +0930	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f37dff04-7f54-4a8e-a31f-d29988f302c3@www.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YKNgziMXms4zWRoY@kroah.com>

On Tue, 18 May 2021, at 16:08, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:00:39AM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 17 May 2021, at 23:45, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:11:05PM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > > > Aspeed Virtual UARTs directly bridge e.g. the system console UART on the
> > > > LPC bus to the UART interface on the BMC's internal APB. As such there's
> > > > no RS-232 signalling involved - the UART interfaces on each bus are
> > > > directly connected as the producers and consumers of the one set of
> > > > FIFOs.
> > > > 
> > > > The APB in the AST2600 generally runs at 100MHz while the LPC bus peaks
> > > > at 33MHz. The difference in clock speeds exposes a race in the VUART
> > > > design where a Tx data burst on the APB interface can result in a byte
> > > > lost on the LPC interface. The symptom is LSR[DR] remains clear on the
> > > > LPC interface despite data being present in its Rx FIFO, while LSR[THRE]
> > > > remains clear on the APB interface as the host has not consumed the data
> > > > the BMC has transmitted. In this state, the UART has stalled and no
> > > > further data can be transmitted without manual intervention (e.g.
> > > > resetting the FIFOs, resulting in loss of data).
> > > > 
> > > > The recommended work-around is to insert a read cycle on the APB
> > > > interface between writes to THR.
> > > > 
> > > > Cc: ChiaWei Wang <chiawei_wang@aspeedtech.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h              | 1 +
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_aspeed_vuart.c | 1 +
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_port.c         | 2 ++
> > > >  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h
> > > > index 52bb21205bb6..4d6f5e0ecd4c 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h
> > > > @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct serial8250_config {
> > > >  #define UART_BUG_NOMSR	(1 << 2)	/* UART has buggy MSR status bits (Au1x00) */
> > > >  #define UART_BUG_THRE	(1 << 3)	/* UART has buggy THRE reassertion */
> > > >  #define UART_BUG_PARITY	(1 << 4)	/* UART mishandles parity if FIFO enabled */
> > > > +#define UART_BUG_TXRACE (1 << 5)	/* UART Tx fails to set remote DR */
> > > 
> > > BUG()?
> > 
> > Can you please expand on what you mean here? I don't follow.
> > 
> > At least, I think there might be a formatting issue (spaces vs tabs).
> 
> Ick, my fault, I meant "BIT()"?  To perhaps use that macro instead of the <<
> symbol.

Ah, that makes a lot more sense.

I'll send two patches. I'll leave the explicit shift in the bug fix for 
the VUARTs for consistency, then in a subsequent patch I'll convert the 
UART_{CAP,BUG}_* macros to use BIT() (which will also clean up 
UART_BUG_TXRACE).

Andrew

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel