[PATCH 1/4] serial: core: Add LED trigger support

[Florian Fainelli]

On 11/24/2016 12:17 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:57:13AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 11/23/2016 02:01 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
>>> With this patch the serial core provides LED triggers for RX and TX.
>>>
>>> As the serial core layer does not know when the hardware actually sends
>>> or receives characters, this needs help from the UART drivers.
>>
>> Looking at 8250, we call serial8250_tx_chars from __start_tx which is
>> called form the uart_ops::start_tx, for RX I sort of agree, since this
>> happens in interrupt handler. I suppose some drivers could actually
>> queue work but not do it right away though?
> 
> RX is not the problem. When characters are received all drivers call
> tty_flip_buffer_push() which could be used for LED triggering (either
> directly or we replace the calls to tty_flip_buffer_push() with some
> wrapper function).
> The problem comes with TX. The serial core has a FIFO which gets
> characters from the tty layer. There is no function which the serial
> drivers could call to read from this FIFO, instead they have to open code
> this.
> Continuing with the 8250 driver serial8250_tx_chars() is not only called
> from __start_tx(), but also from the interrupt handler. Transmission
> works without the serial_core ever noticing.
> 
>>
>>> The LED triggers are registered in uart_add_led_triggers() called from
>>> the UART drivers which want to support LED triggers. All the driver
>>> has to do then is to call uart_led_trigger_[tx|rx] to indicate
>>> activity.
>>
>> Could we somehow remedy the lack of knowledge from the core as whether
>> the HW sends/receives characters first before adding support for LED
>> triggers? It would be more generic and future proof to require UART
>> drivers to report to the core when they actually TX/RX, and then at the
>> core level, utilize that knowledge to perform the LED trigger.
> 
> Maybe we could introduce a function to read from the TX FIFO. Having
> open coded this in each and every driver is not nice anyway.

Something like that could be nice to have yes.

> 
>>
>> Side note: are you positive using drv->dev_name is robust enough on
>> systems with many different UART drivers, yet all of them being ttyS*?
> 
> If we have different UART drivers, only one of them provides ttyS*, no?
> Other drivers will have to use another namespace.

I remember this was a problem a couple of years ago last I tried, with
the 8250 driver being actually preventing other drivers from using
ttyS*, but if you don't have 8250 taking over the low ttyS numbers, you
may run into a case where several drivers successfully register their
character devices under a ttyS* numbering scheme.

Whether this is hypothetical or not nowadays, it may be nicer to provide
a more uniquely distinct name like what dev_name() returns, or
ttyS*-driver-tx for instance?
-- 
Florian