[PATCH 6/7] OMAP: Serial: Allow UART parameters to be configured from board file

Govindraj govindraj.ti at gmail.com
Fri Mar 4 01:25:45 EST 2011


On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Sricharan R <r.sricharan at ti.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Govindraj [mailto:govindraj.ti at gmail.com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 3:37 PM
>>To: Sricharan R
>>Cc: Govindraj.R; linux-omap at vger.kernel.org;
> linux-serial at vger.kernel.org;
>>linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; Jon Hunter; Tony Lindgren; Benoit
>>Cousson; Kevin Hilman; Paul Walmsley; Rajendra Nayak; Deepak Kattungal
>>Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] OMAP: Serial: Allow UART parameters to be
>>configured from board file
>>
>>On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Sricharan R <r.sricharan at ti.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Govindraj [mailto:govindraj.ti at gmail.com]
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 1:11 PM
>>>>To: Sricharan R
>>>>Cc: Govindraj.R; linux-omap at vger.kernel.org;
>>> linux-serial at vger.kernel.org;
>>>>linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; Jon Hunter; Tony Lindgren; Benoit
>>>>Cousson; Kevin Hilman; Paul Walmsley; Rajendra Nayak; Deepak Kattungal
>>>>Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] OMAP: Serial: Allow UART parameters to be
>>>>configured from board file
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Sricharan R <r.sricharan at ti.com>
> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/serial.c
>>> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/serial.c
>>>>>>index 755f4aa..530e9e3 100644
>>>>>>--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/serial.c
>>>>>>+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/serial.c
>>>>>>@@ -44,6 +44,15 @@
>>>>>>
>>>>>> static int omap_uart_con_id __initdata = -1;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>+static struct omap_uart_port_info omap_serial_default_info[] = {
>>>>>>+      {
>>>>>>+              .dma_enabled    = 0,
>>>>>>+              .dma_rx_buf_size = DEFAULT_RXDMA_BUFSIZE,
>>>>>>+              .dma_rx_timeout = DEFAULT_RXDMA_TIMEOUT,
>>>>>>+              .idle_timeout   = DEFAULT_IDLE_TIMEOUT,
>>>>>>+      },
>>>>>>+};
>>>>>>+
>>>>>> static int uart_idle_hwmod(struct omap_device *od)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>       omap_hwmod_idle(od->hwmods[0]);
>>>>>>@@ -66,6 +75,54 @@ static struct omap_device_pm_latency
>>>>> omap_uart_latency[]
>>>>>>= {
>>>>>>       },
>>>>>> };
>>>>>>
>>>>>>+#ifdef CONFIG_OMAP_MUX
>>>>>>+static struct omap_device_pad default_serial0_pads[] __initdata = {
>>>>>>+      {
>>>>>>+              .name   = "uart1_rx.uart1_rx",
>>>>>>+              .flags  = OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_REMUX |
>>> OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_WAKEUP,
>>>>>>+              .enable = OMAP_MUX_MODE0,
>>>>>>+      },
>>>>>>+};
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+static struct omap_device_pad default_serial1_pads[] __initdata = {
>>>>>>+      {
>>>>>>+              .name   = "uart2_rx.uart2_rx",
>>>>>>+              .flags  = OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_REMUX |
>>> OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_WAKEUP,
>>>>>>+              .enable = OMAP_MUX_MODE0,
>>>>>>+      },
>>>>>>+};
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+static struct omap_device_pad default_serial2_pads[] __initdata = {
>>>>>>+      {
>>>>>>+              .name   = "uart3_rx_irrx.uart3_rx_irrx",
>>>>>>+              .flags  = OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_REMUX |
>>> OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_WAKEUP,
>>>>>>+              .enable = OMAP_MUX_MODE0,
>>>>>>+      },
>>>>>>+};
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+static struct omap_device_pad default_omap36xx_serial3_pads[]
>>> __initdata
>>>>> =
>>>>>>{
>>>>>>+      {
>>>>>>+              .name   = "gpmc_wait3.uart4_rx",
>>>>>>+              .flags  = OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_REMUX |
>>> OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_WAKEUP,
>>>>>>+              .enable = OMAP_MUX_MODE2,
>>>>>>+      },
>>>>>>+};
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+static struct omap_device_pad default_omap4_serial3_pads[]
> __initdata
>>> =
>>>>> {
>>>>>>+      {
>>>>>>+              .name   = "uart4_rx.uart4_rx",
>>>>>>+              .flags  = OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_REMUX |
>>> OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_WAKEUP,
>>>>>>+              .enable = OMAP_MUX_MODE0,
>>>>>>+      },
>>>>>>+};
>>>>> Here only the UART RX pins are muxed, so what about the cts, rts, tx
>>>>pins?
>>>>
>>>>The intention here is to enable wakeup capabilities for uart rx pad.
>>>>
>>>>AFAIK most of the boards are currently dependent on bootloader for
>>>>uart-muxing if any board is not dependent on bootloader then we
>>>>can use omap_serial_init_port along with board_mux_info from board.
>>>>
>>> Yes. The idea is to be independent of the bootloaders for mux settings.
>>>
>>>>Prior to this change uart wakeup is based on rx_pad and we were
>>> populating
>>>>offset and using omap_ctrl api's to read/write which is cleaned up now.
>>>>Most of boards are dependent on uart-rx wakeup to avoid breaking any
>>>>board support we
>>>>are using omap_serial_init by filling default values, which provides
>>>>us with same
>>>>environment but with right approach towards handling mux data with a
>>>>handshake with
>>>>hwmod framework.
>>>>
>>> Now, in this change only the RX pin is configured. So if some board
> uses
>>> omap_serial_init then only the RX is going to be configured.
>>> How will they configure the rest of the pins?
>>
>>
>>They should call omap_serial_init_port to configure each individual uart
>>with
>>mux_info filled and not use omap_serial_init.
>>
>>If any board is not dependent for mux from u-boot then they use above
> said
>>init_port func.
>>
>>
>>> They cannot call omap_serial_init_port after this just to configure the
>>> rest of the mux pins( cts, rts, tx).
>>
>>No. You need to use either omap_serial_init_port or omap_serial_init
>>you cannot call both apis from board file please refer to both func
>>documentation.
>>
>>Also please note i am not configuring all uart pins for pullups and pull
>>downs
>>with this patch series and its not related to this patch series.
>>I am only enabling wakeup-enable pin for rx as it was done before.
>>
>>> So data which is passed from omap_serial_init should have the
>>> configuration
>>> for all the pins, and this default data should be consistent across
>>> atleast
>>> some boards, so that they can use this. This will reduce the data
>>> duplication across board files.
>>>
>>> If this is not true, then all the pads can be configured from the board
>>> files itself using omap_serial_init_port and you can set the required
>>> RX wakeup capability there as well.
>>>
>>
>>Yes that be done but currently but that is not in my intention here
>>with my patch
>>I just want to retain rx wakeup by default to avoid breaking support
>>for any board.
>>
>>Adding pin mux for each individual pin is a separate activity where I
> also
>>need access to various boards So I am leaving that to developers who
>>want to configure
>>for the corresponding boards using init_port api.
>>
>>Removing mux from u-boot level and adding it to board file is beyond
>>the scope of this
>>patch series and is a separate topic of discussion, as current patch
> series
>>assumes that uarts are muxed from u-boot level and needs to only enable
>>wakeup
>>capability for rx-pin.
>>
>>Hope this clarifies.
>>
> It is true that this patch is not intending to configure the pads.
>
> But my question is, after this patch say
>   1) some board file calls omap_serial_port.
>   2) As a result , all the uarts devices are build and only the Rx pad is
> configured for each device.
>   3) After this there will be no way of configuring the rest of the pads
> ??
>      That should not happen. Also relying that the bootloaders are going
>      to do the configuration is not correct.
>
>      So if some board calls omap_serial_port then there should be default
> values for all pads which a board can use, otherwise the board calls
> omap_serial_init_port for each of the device.

ok I will add default values for all pads and enable rx wakeup for rx pad.

Will incorporate in next version.

--
Thanks,
Govindraj.R



>
>
>>--
>>Thanks,
>>Govindraj.R
>>
>>
>>>>So if any board needs specific mux they can go ahead and add required
>>>>mux data in
>>>>board file and use map_serial_init_port instead of current
>>>>omap_serial_init.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Is it consistent that across all socs that only UART3 would have
>>>>UART/IRDA
>>>>> functions capability so that serial2 pads can always be called
>>> "rx_irxx"
>>>>> ?.
>>>>
>>>>Yes from OMAP2420 to OMAP4430 uart3 can used as irda.
>>>>
>>> Ok.
>>>>--
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Govindraj.R
>>>
>



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list