[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vcx_xAY2A4XNgQ1ea_U5mUnD1+6=2FxCM3KzsRSpxgRuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:48:16 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@....com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
"ijc+devicetree" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] serial: mps2-uart: add MPS2 UART driver
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Vladimir Murzin
<vladimir.murzin@....com> wrote:
> This driver adds support to the UART controller found on ARM MPS2
> platform.
> +static irqreturn_t mps2_uart_oerrirq(int irq, void *data)
> +{
> + irqreturn_t handled = IRQ_NONE;
> + struct uart_port *port = data;
> + u8 irqflag = mps2_uart_read8(port, UARTn_INT);
> +
> + spin_lock(&port->lock);
> +
> + if (irqflag & UARTn_INT_RX_OVERRUN) {
> + struct tty_port *tport = &port->state->port;
> +
> + mps2_uart_write8(port, UARTn_INT_RX_OVERRUN, UARTn_INT);
> + tty_insert_flip_char(tport, 0, TTY_OVERRUN);
> + port->icount.overrun++;
> + handled = IRQ_HANDLED;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * It's never been seen in practice and it never *should* happen since
> + * we check if there is enough room in TX buffer before sending data.
> + * So we keep this check in case something suspicious has happened.
> + */
> + if (irqflag & UARTn_INT_TX_OVERRUN) {
> + mps2_uart_write8(port, UARTn_INT_TX_OVERRUN, UARTn_INT);
> + dev_warn(port->dev, "unexpected overrun interrupt\n");
I'm not sure there is no dead lock if this happens on the same port
which is used as console.
> + handled = IRQ_HANDLED;
> + }
> +
> + spin_unlock(&port->lock);
> +
> + return handled;
> +}
> +
> +static int mps2_uart_startup(struct uart_port *port)
> +{
> + struct mps2_uart_port *mps_port = to_mps2_port(port);
> + u8 control = mps2_uart_read8(port, UARTn_CTRL);
> + int ret;
> +
> + control &= ~(UARTn_CTRL_RX_GRP | UARTn_CTRL_TX_GRP);
> +
> + mps2_uart_write8(port, control, UARTn_CTRL);
> +
> + ret = request_irq(mps_port->rx_irq, mps2_uart_rxirq, 0,
> + MAKE_NAME(-rx), mps_port);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(port->dev, "failed to register rxirq (%d)\n", ret);
> + goto err_no_rxirq;
It should be below, here just a plain return.
> + }
> +
> + ret = request_irq(mps_port->tx_irq, mps2_uart_txirq, 0,
> + MAKE_NAME(-tx), mps_port);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(port->dev, "failed to register txirq (%d)\n", ret);
> + goto err_no_txirq;
goto err_free_rxirq;
> + }
> +
> + ret = request_irq(port->irq, mps2_uart_oerrirq, IRQF_SHARED,
> + MAKE_NAME(-overrun), mps_port);
> +
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(port->dev, "failed to register oerrirq (%d)\n", ret);
Why not goto pattern here as well?
goto err_free_txirq;
> + } else {
…and remove this else.
> + control |= UARTn_CTRL_RX_GRP | UARTn_CTRL_TX_GRP;
> +
> + mps2_uart_write8(port, control, UARTn_CTRL);
> +
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + free_irq(mps_port->tx_irq, mps_port);
> +err_no_txirq:
> + free_irq(mps_port->rx_irq, mps_port);
> +err_no_rxirq:
> + return ret;
> +}
> +static struct mps2_uart_port mps2_uart_ports[MPS2_MAX_PORTS];
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SERIAL_MPS2_UART_CONSOLE
> +static void mps2_uart_console_putchar(struct uart_port *port, int ch)
> +{
> + while (mps2_uart_read8(port, UARTn_STATE) & UARTn_STATE_TX_FULL)
> + cpu_relax();
Infinite?
> +
> + mps2_uart_write8(port, ch, UARTn_DATA);
> +}
> +static int mps2_init_port(struct mps2_uart_port *mps_port,
> + struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + struct resource *res;
Maybe:
struct resource *res;
int ret;
?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists