[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK7LNARG6F97s9gTY_YZi0srKUBebFd1uBJhbVjzj_dAn9+nsg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 20:18:09 +0900
From: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Joachim Eastwood <manabian@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <ricardo.ribalda@...il.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
<"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org\" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>"@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] serial: 8250_uniphier: add UniPhier serial driver
Hi Alan,
2015-05-19 18:48 GMT+09:00 One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>:
>> I intentionally use deeper indentation for *_SHIFT
>> because I want to clearly show UNIPHIER_UART_LCR_SHIFT
>> belongs to UNIPHIER_UART_LCR_MCR register.
>
> Seems sensible to do it that way to me and a lot of other bits of the
> kernel do.
>
> The only other question I have is about the unipher_serial_out. If I am
> writing a "special" register then the sequence becomes
>
> - read 32bits
> - modify
> - write 32bits
>
> That means that it's no longer atomic safe as the kernel expects.
> Checking the users FCR seems safe, LCR is probably safe and MCR likewise
> so I don't see a problem but I think it's worth noting in case anyone
> else does.
Uh, I missed this.
I am a bit afraid what if LCR and MCR are updated at the same time.
Is it better to add mutex for writing special case registers?
if (normal) {
writel(value, p->membase + offset);
} else {
/* special case: two registers share the same address. */
u32 tmp = readl(p->membase + offset);
struct uniphier8250_priv *priv = p->private_data;
mutex_lock(&priv->atomic_write_lock);
tmp &= ~(0xff << valshift);
tmp |= value << valshift;
writel(tmp, p->membase + offset);
mutex_unlock(&priv->atomic_write_lock);
}
If it is OK, I can fix it in v4.
> Finally can you add a comment in serial_in and serial_out where one
> switch case drops through into the next so its obvious to anyone looking
> at Coverity and other analyser output that this drop through was
> intentional ?
I thought about it, too.
My previous version was as follows:
+#define UNIPHIER_UART_CHAR_FCR 3
+#define UNIPHIER_UART_CHAR_SHIFT 8 /* Character Register */
+#define UNIPHIER_UART_FCR_SHIFT 0 /* FIFO Control Register */
+#define UNIPHIER_UART_LCR_MCR 4
+#define UNIPHIER_UART_LCR_SHIFT 8 /* Line Control Register */
+#define UNIPHIER_UART_MCR_SHIFT 0 /* Modem Control Register */
+#define UNIPHIER_UART_DLR 9 /* Divisor Latch Register */
[snip]
+static void uniphier_serial_out(struct uart_port *p, int offset, int value)
+{
+ int valshift = 0;
+ bool normal = false;
+
+ switch (offset) {
+ case UART_FCR:
+ offset = UNIPHIER_UART_CHAR_FCR;
+ valshift = UNIPHIER_UART_FCR_SHIFT;
+ break;
+ case UART_LCR:
+ offset = UNIPHIER_UART_LCR_MCR;
+ valshift = UNIPHIER_UART_LCR_SHIFT;
+ /* Divisor latch access bit does not exist. */
+ value &= ~(UART_LCR_DLAB << valshift);
+ break;
+ case UART_MCR:
+ offset = UNIPHIER_UART_LCR_MCR;
+ valshift = UNIPHIER_UART_MCR_SHIFT;
+ break;
+ default:
+ normal = true;
+ break;
+ }
I thought it was clear to anyone although it was a bit redundant and
Matthias was opposed to it.
I personally prefer clear code to tricky code that requires comments.
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists