[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221204091247.GA11195@nyquist.nev>
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2022 22:12:47 +1300
From: Daniel Beer <daniel.beer@...rinstitute.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Zaidman <michael.zaidman@...il.com>,
Christina Quast <contact@...istina-quast.de>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hid-ft260: add UART support.
On Sun, Dec 04, 2022 at 09:18:52AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 11:19:20AM +1300, Daniel Beer wrote:
> > Based on an earlier patch submitted by Christina Quast:
> >
> > https://patches.linaro.org/project/linux-serial/patch/20220928192421.11908-1-contact@christina-quast.de/
>
> Please link to lore.kernel.org, we have no idea what will happen over
> time to other domains/links.
>
> > Simplified and reworked to use the UART API rather than the TTY layer
> > directly. Transmit, receive and baud rate changes are supported.
>
> Why use the uart layer? Did you just change how the existing driver
> works?
Hi Greg,
Thanks for reviewing. This device is quite strange -- it presents itself
as a USB HID, but it provides both an I2C master and a UART. The
existing driver supports only the I2C functionality currently.
> > +struct ft260_configure_uart_request {
> > + u8 report; /* FT260_SYSTEM_SETTINGS */
> > + u8 request; /* FT260_SET_UART_CONFIG */
> > + u8 flow_ctrl; /* 0: OFF, 1: RTS_CTS, 2: DTR_DSR */
> > + /* 3: XON_XOFF, 4: No flow ctrl */
> > + __le32 baudrate; /* little endian, 9600 = 0x2580, 19200 = 0x4B00 */
>
> The data structure in the device really looks like this? Unaligned
> accesses are odd.
Yes, that really is the data structure. Is there a better way to do
this?
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/major.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/major.h
> > @@ -175,4 +175,6 @@
> > #define BLOCK_EXT_MAJOR 259
> > #define SCSI_OSD_MAJOR 260 /* open-osd's OSD scsi device */
> >
> > +#define FT260_MAJOR 261
>
> A whole new major for just a single tty port? Please no, use dynamic
> majors if you have to, or better yet, tie into the usb-serial
> implementation (this is a USB device, right?) and then you don't have to
> mess with this at all.
As far as I understand it, I don't think usb-serial is usable, due to
the fact that this is already an HID driver.
I'll change to use dynamic majors, unless there's a better option.
> > +
> > #endif
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/serial_core.h b/include/uapi/linux/serial_core.h
> > index 3ba34d8378bd..d9a7025f467e 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/serial_core.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/serial_core.h
> > @@ -276,4 +276,7 @@
> > /* Sunplus UART */
> > #define PORT_SUNPLUS 123
> >
> > +/* FT260 HID UART */
> > +#define PORT_FT260 124
>
> Why is this required? What userspace code needs this new id? I want to
> remove all of these ids, not add new ones.
It probably isn't. I'd taken another driver as an example when
implementing this, and that's what it did. Should I instead set the port
field to PORT_UNKNOWN and return NULL from uart_type?
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel Beer
Firmware Engineer at Igor Institute
daniel.beer@...rinstitute.com or +64-27-420-8101
Offices in Seattle, San Francisco, and Vancouver BC or (206) 494-3312
Powered by blists - more mailing lists