[RESENDv5] serial: of-serial: fix up PM ops on no_console_suspend and port type
f.fainelli at gmail.com
Mon Nov 10 22:15:23 PST 2014
2014-11-10 21:41 GMT-08:00 Jingchang Lu <jingchang.lu at freescale.com>:
>>From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh at linuxfoundation.org]
>>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 1:27 PM
>>To: Florian Fainelli
>>Cc: Lu Jingchang-B35083; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; linux-
>>kernel at vger.kernel.org; linux-serial at vger.kernel.org
>>Subject: Re: [RESENDv5] serial: of-serial: fix up PM ops on
>>no_console_suspend and port type
>>On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 08:30:36PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> 2014-10-27 2:24 GMT-07:00 Jingchang Lu <jingchang.lu at freescale.com>:
>>> > This patch fixes commit 2dea53bf57783f243c892e99c10c6921e956aa7e,
>>> > "serial: of-serial: add PM suspend/resume support", which disables
>>> > the uart clock on suspend, but also causes a hardware hang on
>>> > register access if no_console_suspend command line option is used.
>>> > Also, not every of_serial device is an 8250 port, so the serial8250
>>> > suspend/resume functions should only be applied to a real 8250 port.
>>> Greg, can you pick this one and submit it for your next 3.18-rc
>>> submission? This fixes a regression when using "no_console_suspend"
>>> introduced by:
>>> 2dea53bf57783f243c892e99c10c6921e956aa7e ("serial: of-serial: add PM
>>> suspend/resume support") which has been merged during 3.18-rc1
>>Why can't I just revert that patch instead? This is really late in the -
>>rc cycle to be doing large fixes like this.
>>And this patch is already queued up for 3.19-rc1, so this is a mess...
>>Any objection to me just reverting
>>2dea53bf57783f243c892e99c10c6921e956aa7e, and then this one in my tty-next
>>branch as well, and then someone resending the original patch in a format
>>that actually works?
> Do you mean resending the "serial: of-serial: add PM suspend/resume support"
> patch with "serial: of-serial: fix up PM ops on no_console_suspend and port type"
> merged together? For you would like to reverting the previous patch of
That is how I understand Greg's suggestion. While you are at it you
might want to introduce a space between the 'switch' keyword and the
open-parenthesis in the two call sites that you added. Feel free to
Tested-by: Florina Fainelli <f.fainelli at gmail.com>
since I use your v5 patch locally, thanks!
More information about the linux-arm-kernel