Am Mittwoch, den 07.05.2008, 14:44 -0500 schrieb Scott Wood:
> Scott Wood wrote:
> > Sergej Stepanov wrote:
> >> Hm... it looks like the default uart_set_termios from
> >>
> >> static const struct tty_operations uart_ops in serial_core.c
> >>
> >> and not cpm_uart_set_termios(..)?..
> >>
> >> Is n
Scott Wood wrote:
Sergej Stepanov wrote:
Hm... it looks like the default uart_set_termios from
static const struct tty_operations uart_ops in serial_core.c
and not cpm_uart_set_termios(..)?..
Is not it? but why?...
tty_operations != uart_ops
Despite the unfortunate name of the instance of
Sergej Stepanov wrote:
Hm... it looks like the default uart_set_termios from
static const struct tty_operations uart_ops in serial_core.c
and not cpm_uart_set_termios(..)?..
Is not it? but why?...
tty_operations != uart_ops
-Scott
___
Linuxppc-dev
Am Mittwoch, den 07.05.2008, 14:34 -0500 schrieb Scott Wood:
> Sergej Stepanov wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 07.05.2008, 13:57 -0500 schrieb Scott Wood:
> >> I'm not sure how it would make a difference -- the BRG should have
> >> already been set through the set_termios callback, which is called fr
Sergej Stepanov wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 07.05.2008, 13:57 -0500 schrieb Scott Wood:
I'm not sure how it would make a difference -- the BRG should have
already been set through the set_termios callback, which is called from
uart_set_options.
-Scott
Yes, i thought it also, but i traced it for
Am Mittwoch, den 07.05.2008, 13:57 -0500 schrieb Scott Wood:
> Sergej Stepanov wrote:
> > My story is follow: we have mpc8247 based card.
> > The problem with smc happens due to the cpm reset.
> > Of course, if you have not CONFIG_PPC_EARLY_DEBUG_CPM with
> > CONFIG_PPC_CPM_NEW_BINDING.
> > May be
Sergej Stepanov wrote:
My story is follow: we have mpc8247 based card.
The problem with smc happens due to the cpm reset.
Of course, if you have not CONFIG_PPC_EARLY_DEBUG_CPM with
CONFIG_PPC_CPM_NEW_BINDING.
May be it is some kind of mistake, but i could fix the problem with the
patch i told abo
Boris Shteinbock wrote:
The second reg resource depends on where your firmware set up the SMC pram
regs. With U-boot, it's usually zero.
Note that as of 2.6.26-rc1, this is set up dynamically instead, and the
second resource should be .
Is this correct?
reg = <0x11a80 0x20 0x87fc 2>
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 01:31:52AM -0700, Boris Shteinbock wrote:
> /* Monitor port/SMC1 */
> smc1: [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
>device_type = "serial";
>compatible = "fsl,mpc8260-smc-uart",
> "fsl,cpm2-smc-uart";
>reg = <0x11a80 0x20 0x1100 0x40>;
>Th
Hello Scott
Am Mittwoch, den 07.05.2008, 13:22 -0500 schrieb Scott Wood:
> On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 01:31:52AM -0700, Boris Shteinbock wrote:
> > /* Monitor port/SMC1 */
> > smc1: [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> >device_type = "serial";
> >compatible = "fsl,mpc8260-smc-uart",
> >
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 01:31:52AM -0700, Boris Shteinbock wrote:
> /* Monitor port/SMC1 */
> smc1: [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
>device_type = "serial";
>compatible = "fsl,mpc8260-smc-uart",
> "fsl,cpm2-smc-uart";
>reg = <0x11a80 0x20 0x1100 0x40>;
The
Hallo.
I had the same problem.
The following patch can help.
diff -pruN paulus-git/drivers/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_core.c
linuxppc-2.6.24-ids8247/drivers/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_core.c
--- paulus-git/drivers/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_core.c 2008-03-28
11:03:32.0 +0100
+++ linuxppc-2.6
12 matches
Mail list logo
