[PATCH 1/2] imx: Add save/restore functions for UART control regs
Dirk Behme
dirk.behme at googlemail.com
Mon Dec 19 01:49:56 EST 2011
On 19.12.2011 04:49, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 06:34:14PM +0100, Dirk Behme wrote:
>> Factor out the uart save/restore functionality instead of
>> having the same code several times in the driver.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme<dirk.behme at gmail.com>
>> CC: Saleem Abdulrasool<compnerd at compnerd.org>
>> CC: Sascha Hauer<s.hauer at pengutronix.de>
>> CC: Fabio Estevam<festevam at gmail.com>
>> CC: Uwe Kleine-König<u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de>
>> CC: linux-serial at vger.kernel.org
>> ---
>> drivers/tty/serial/imx.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> 1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/imx.c b/drivers/tty/serial/imx.c
>> index 163fc90..6a01c2a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/imx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/imx.c
>> @@ -260,6 +260,31 @@ static inline int is_imx21_uart(struct imx_port *sport)
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> + * Save and restore functions for UCR1, UCR2 and UCR3 registers
>> + */
>> +static void imx_console_mode(struct uart_port *port,
>
> Function name imx_console_mode seems not like a couple with
> imx_console_restore. And I guess something like
> imx_port_ucrs_save[restore] would be better?
>
>> + unsigned int *ucr1,
>> + unsigned int *ucr2,
>> + unsigned int *ucr3)
>
> Can we define something like 'struct imx_port_ucrs' to contains these?
Yes, we could have different function names above and use a struct.
I implemented what Sascha asked for in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg144960.html
though:
-- Sascha wrote: --
I'm thinking about:
imx_console_mode(struct uart_port *port, u32 *ucr1, u32 *ucr2, u32 *ucr2);
imx_console_restore(struct uart_port *port, u32 ucr1, u32 ucr2, u32 ucr3);
-- Sascha end --
It seems Shawn proposes
imx_port_ucrs_save(struct uart_port *port, struct *imx_port_ucrs);
imx_port_ucrs_restore(struct uart_port *port, struct *imx_port_ucrs);
(?)
Sascha, Shawn: Could you agree on what we should use?
Once you agreed, I will send an update of both two patches.
Many thanks and best regards
Dirk
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list